PDA

View Full Version : Firearms?



Thomix
2007-09-12, 06:58 PM
I'm planning to put some firearm in the next DnD campaign i'll DM. Did someone have advice? house rules? What do you think about the stats for firearms in the DMG ?

Please, post your comment ,idea, or everything else.

horseboy
2007-09-12, 07:36 PM
Hp+firearms=bad
The only time I've ever seen it work well, is for them to cause stat damage

Fax Celestis
2007-09-12, 07:38 PM
The DMG's firearms are very powerful at low levels and next to worthless at high ones, just so you are aware.

EDIT: if you're looking for some variety, take a look at a collection of homebrewed d20 modern weapons of mine.

Swordguy
2007-09-12, 07:47 PM
Use Vitality/Wounds instead of Hit points. Critical hits do damage to wounds. They generally work okay under that ruleset (see: Stargate SG-1 RPG, Shadowforce ARCHER).

Fax Celestis
2007-09-12, 07:49 PM
Use Vitality/Wounds instead of Hit points. Critical hits do damage to wounds. They generally work okay under that ruleset (see: Stargate SG-1 RPG, Shadowforce ARCHER).

And also Star Wars: SAGA, if I am not mistaken.

Riffington
2007-09-12, 08:09 PM
Before we give you advice on stats, tell us what role you want firearms to play.

Are they awesome weapons that only the rich can afford?
Cheap weapons that require little training to be effective, but which are still inferior to longbows in skilled hands?
A racial weapon?
Ubiquitous?

MrNexx
2007-09-12, 08:14 PM
Another option is exploding dice, as they used in 2nd edition. Whenever you rolled maximum on any die, you rolled again, and kept adding. If you kept it at d6s for damage, the odds aren't bad.

Thomix
2007-09-12, 08:45 PM
The firearms will not come from the empire the PCs start in ,but from another one. The 2 empires will eventualy start war again each other, so, the PCs will confront NPCs with firearms.

And I let the PCs take firearms if they want, but they have to take the exotic weapon proficiency feat ( those who come from the empire who have firearms have that feat for free, but no PCs can come from there( at least, from now), so only NPCs)

ArmorArmadillo
2007-09-12, 09:01 PM
Generally, I believe several things about the rules given:
1. Guns should be simple weapons, not exotic weapons. They are extremely simple to use, moreso than any other weapon in the DMG...that is the entire point of them. Training an armed knight is a difficult and expensive undertaking; training a rifleman involves giving them a mass-produced gun and some basic training.

2. Guns should not be significantly better damage than other weapons because they are 'higher tech'; guns came into being because of their range, ease of use, and ease of production.

3. The reloading times on guns are a mistake. Even if it provides a sense of realism when addressing the minute-long loading times of old-fashioned weapons, it makes them unplayable, as you are shooting every other turn without rapid reload, and can't full attack or rapid shot with them.


If you want to have them, I think you should reduce damage by 1 or 2 die, make them simple weapons, and reduce the loading times to that of a crossbow.

Neon Knight
2007-09-12, 09:33 PM
2. Guns should not be significantly better damage than other weapons because they are 'higher tech'; guns came into being because of their range, ease of use, and ease of production.



This statement seems to contradict the general consensus that I have heard/read. The last two yes, but better range? Until rifling became feasible, guns were highly inaccurate and had poor range, due to an arcing trajectory. Guns really became powerful and long range with the switch over to smokeless powder instead of the less efficient black powder.

Anywho, on topic.

Your firearms need not necessarily be realistic or form along the lines they did in the real world.

I'd say pick a style and run with it. Powerful, but single shot with long reload times is viable. Usually, players will either use it once and then charge into melee/start spell slinging, or they will keep a bandolier full of pistols and quickdraw until they run out of loaded pistols. Or they might use it as a finish weapon to kill off nearly dead foes. It is that this style probably doesn't work too well at high levels, so you might want to take that into consideration.

The quicker rate of fire, but not quite so powerful, route is also fine. I personally prefer the above feel, but whatever floats you boat.

Personally, I'd make them Exotic for everyone but Fighters and maybe Paladins, who treat them as Martial weapons. Might reflect their focus on the arts of combat. Also gives the poor fighter something special. Anyone can pick up a gun and shoot it, but accuracy is something gained only with skill and training. This might not be as true with modern firearms, but for primitive ones it might. You might consider only a -2 instead of a -4 penalty for non proficiency.

So, to summarize:

Choose between powerful single shot style or more rapid use style.

With Powerful Style:
Proficiency requirements probably preferable.

With Rapid Style:
Treating them as simple weapons would be okay.

Swordguy
2007-09-12, 09:35 PM
Shooting a gun is easy. Point and click. Even with smoothbore blackpowder weapons dating back to matchlocks.

LOADING a gun is hard. That's where the "exotic" part comes in.

TheThan
2007-09-12, 09:36 PM
There are some problems that arise from using firearms in dnd, each one is thought out below.

Problem 1: The sniper
Eventually someone will get the bright idea to be a sniper in your game. This may not seem like a bad idea but trust me it is. The DnD combat system does not support the concepts behind a sniper. Sure its got rules for cover, hiding, ranged attacks etc. But the game assumes that the party will stay with each other and work together as a team. A sniper must be alone and in hiding in order to be effective. So while that sniper is sitting out there alone, his comrades are out there where the action is, he won’t be with them and therefor will not be taking part of the adventure and the player will inevitably become board with his character choice. I’m not even going to get into potential Xp issues for not being with the party when they earn some.
The easiest solution to this problem is to disallow sniper style character concepts. If a player complains simply point out the problems and hopefully he/she/it will see you’re point of view.

Problem 2: the gunsmith
It’s bound to happen, someone will decide that they want to create advanced weapons to use. I hate to be a stick in the mud about this but I’m going to go ahead and assume that this player is simply trying to power game. Whether you’re using modern firearms or simpler muskets. This poses a problem because if you allow it to get out of hand, you’ll be dealing with enchanted laser rifles and nuclear launchers, or at the very least mini guns. Nobody likes having their game broken by a simple oversight.
Now to prevent this from happening you have two choices: ban all crafting skills. Or you could tell your people that any attempt to push the technology level beyond what it is will meet with automatic failure and dice swiftly thrown at said player’s head. Naturally these two options will lead to players becoming upset that they won’t be able to do use such a “cool” concept. Just tell them that that’s the price they’ll have to pay in order to keep the world running smoothly.

Problem 3: the demolition man
Guns use explosives to propel a bullet at a target. This isn’t so much of a problem as when they decide to use the powder for their guns as grenades. Used once in a while isn’t a problem but when the PCs stop and begin making their own grenades you’ll probably want to put a stop to it as they’ll be likely to use them every chance they get. If they’re insistent on using them and you’re ok with it, I suggest you provide them with specially built grenades. Also don’t be afraid to use them against you’re opponents. There’s nothing more frightening than kamikaze goblins.



Aim small, Miss small: or how to do guns right.

Now in order to do guns right you will probably need two variant rules.

Rule one: damage threshold (borrowed from D20 Modern)
A creature can only take so much damage at one time. If they ever take more damage than their constitution score in one attack, they must make a fortitude save equal to the damage dealt. Failure results in automatic death. Success means they take the damage but are not in danger of dying out right. So if a creature/pc has say a 16 in its constitution score it can take up to 16 points of damage without having to make a damage threshold check. Keep in mind that this takes effect only when they suffer more than their damage threshold in one hit.

Rule two: Class defense bonus.
It stands to reason that firearms would render armor mostly useless. So people would become adapt in not wearing armor. Just follow the rules in the linky to learn how.
Class defense bonus (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/defenseBonus.htm)


With these two rules in place you won’t have to use a drastic change to the hit point system. Plus these rules and quick and easy to implement, just inform your players beforehand. The most important thing is to have fun with it and get your players to have fun as well.

Lets see, that’s all I can think of off the top of my head. If you have any questions feel free to ask.

Neon Knight
2007-09-12, 09:44 PM
Rule two: Class defense bonus.
It stands to reason that firearms would render armor mostly useless. So people would become adapt in not wearing armor. Just follow the rules in the linky to learn how.
Class defense bonus (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/defenseBonus.htm)


It depends upon what type of gun we're talking here. Early gunpowder weapons could actually be bested by advanced suits of plate mail. At one point, new suits of mail were proofed by discharging a firearm into it, and then the dent was embellished to draw attention to the fact that the suit was gun proof (at least in the part struck). Indeed, body armor was in (rare) use during the time of the civil war. The movement away from armor probably had more to do with conscript armies with gunpowder weapons being more effective than heavily armored professional armies. In addition, mobility became more of a concern as we shifted from medieval type siege warfare to open field style combat. Cannons as field artillery could also have furthered this.

Smokeless powder has a yield about 3 times that of black powder. If we're talking smokeless powder, then most personal body armor of the traditional medieval sense will probably be outclassed.

EDIT:
There are some problems that arise from using firearms in dnd, each one is thought out below.

Problem 1: The sniper
Eventually someone will get the bright idea to be a sniper in your game. This may not seem like a bad idea but trust me it is. The DnD combat system does not support the concepts behind a sniper. Sure its got rules for cover, hiding, ranged attacks etc. But the game assumes that the party will stay with each other and work together as a team. A sniper must be alone and in hiding in order to be effective. So while that sniper is sitting out there alone, his comrades are out there where the action is, he won’t be with them and therefor will not be taking part of the adventure and the player will inevitably become board with his character choice. I’m not even going to get into potential Xp issues for not being with the party when they earn some.
The easiest solution to this problem is to disallow sniper style character concepts. If a player complains simply point out the problems and hopefully he/she/it will see you’re point of view.

Assuming the weapons he intends to put in are smoothbore black powder weapons, the very idea of someone attempting to snipe is laughable.

Even adding rifling, he won't be that far away from the party unless we're talking smokeless powder, which gives you the range and accuracy to do something resembling sniping.

Also, there is nothing wrong with number 3. Hand thrown iron bombs were an early invention using gunpowder. We already have grenade like DnD weapons. One employing gunpowder isn't going to mess things up.

#2 is also not a concern. Advances in firearms require advances in engineering, metallurgy, and a dozen other sciences. Modern firearms are actually pretty complex, and reproducing them with medieval (even late medieval or early renaissance) technology would be impossible.

Dr. Weasel
2007-09-12, 10:36 PM
Problem 1: The sniper...
This is more easily a problem with bows which actually benefit the stealth aspect more than firearms and, in a midieval setting, are more accurate than guns.


Problem 2: the gunsmith...
This isn't a problem just as building a functional tank with craft(Ironwork) isn't. A DM just says "no"


Problem 3: the demolition man
Read the "Oil" rules. This won't be any more of a problem than it already is and, worst come to worst, it will give the non-caster/non-skillmonkeys more to do outside of combat.

[Edit:]Ninja-ed by an hour. I can't believe I failed to read that. I'll pretend my post has a new and incredible take on the subject matter.

Talkkno
2007-09-12, 10:59 PM
And also Star Wars: SAGA, if I am not mistaken.

Actully, Saga has reverted to Hp system, but has with the new Condition track thing to compensate.

TheThan
2007-09-12, 11:29 PM
The OP has not yet informed us as to the type style and power of these firearms he’s considering. So I’m painting with broad strokes.



It depends upon what type of gun we're talking here. Early gunpowder weapons could actually be bested by advanced suits of plate mail. At one point, new suits of mail were proofed by discharging a firearm into it, and then the dent was embellished to draw attention to the fact that the suit was gun proof (at least in the part struck). Indeed, body armor was in (rare) use during the time of the civil war. The movement away from armor probably had more to do with conscript armies with gunpowder weapons being more effective than heavily armored professional armies. In addition, mobility became more of a concern as we shifted from medieval type siege warfare to open field style combat. Cannons as field artillery could also have furthered this.


There may have been other contributing factors to the decline of body armor in warfare, but firearms still played a large part (oddly enough as we create more advanced composite materials, we’re seeing a resurgence of body armor in use by militaries and police forces. Basically body armor has caught up to firearms).




Assuming the weapons he intends to put in are smoothbore black powder weapons, the very idea of someone attempting to snipe is laughable.

Even adding rifling, he won't be that far away from the party unless we're talking smokeless powder, which gives you the range and accuracy to do something resembling sniping.


Dnd combat is hardly realistic. With a decent dexterity and good bab making a sniper with guns is just as valid as it is with bows and crossbows. The game doesn’t take into account wind velocity, weapon caliber or any other real world factors, so it is a valid concern for a Dm to have.

If the OP’s using the guns presented in the DMG the rifle has a range increment of 150 feet. That means he can be up to 150 feet away and not suffer any penalties. That’s more range than a composite longbow. So a sniper has plenty of range to snipe from. Unless of course you house rule some stiff restrictions, in which case anything is fair game.




Also, there is nothing wrong with number 3. Hand thrown iron bombs were an early invention using gunpowder. We already have grenade like DnD weapons. One employing gunpowder isn't going to mess things up.


Ok I didn’t quite explain my concerns fully here. It’s not that the players would be using explosives. It’s that they would be improvising them. Which forces a DM to make a rules call with little to no warning. This can cause problems with a Dm and players. When the Dm decides that on set of improvised explosives does Y damage, and the next time it does X damage. The Dm may not have any idea how much it should be done. Dms are not perfect and they can and do make mistakes. Some players may feel that the Dm is purposefully nerfing their tactics by suddenly making it do less damage. This can lead to player resentment and even out right anger.
Which is why I suggested the Dm provide the players with proper explosives to use so the Dm has all the necessary rules in front if him when they sit down to play.



#2 is also not a concern. Advances in firearms require advances in engineering, metallurgy, and a dozen other sciences. Modern firearms are actually pretty complex, and reproducing them with medieval (even late medieval or early renaissance) technology would be impossible.

That may be, but once again we’re talking about DnD not real life. If a player can hit a high enough craft check he can plausibly build anything he wants. There is no built in rules to prevent a player from designing and building a gattling gun (not to mention a more advanced machine gun), or a rocket launcher, or a rail gun.
The Dm has to decide what to allow and what to not allow; otherwise players can run way with the game. I brought it because not everyone realizes how easy crafting can break a game unless the DM takes a strong stance on the subject. I am suggesting that the Dm should avoid any potential abuse by disallowing the crafting of firearms in general. Or alternately to allow it, but disallow the advancement of weapons technology.


Imagine this scenario

Dm:
“You spot the group of orcs up ahead and they spot you. One of them pulls out a musket. The rest charge you with weapons drawn. What do you do?”

Player 1: “I set my lance against their charge.”

Player 2: “I step back behind the fighter and prepare sneak attack the first one to hit the fighter’s lance”

Player 3: “ I’m going pull out my mini gun and open fire, mowing down the whole brigade of orcs, therefore reducing this otherwise difficult encounter into a steaming pile of ****.”

Dm:
Throws dice in frustration

kpenguin
2007-09-13, 12:16 AM
That may be, but once again we’re talking about DnD not real life. If a player can hit a high enough craft check he can plausibly build anything he wants. There is no built in rules to prevent a player from designing and building a gattling gun (not to mention a more advanced machine gun), or a rocket launcher, or a rail gun.
The Dm has to decide what to allow and what to not allow; otherwise players can run way with the game. I brought it because not everyone realizes how easy crafting can break a game unless the DM takes a strong stance on the subject. I am suggesting that the Dm should avoid any potential abuse by disallowing the crafting of firearms in general. Or alternately to allow it, but disallow the advancement of weapons technology.

If that were true, than a player under current rules could create a missile using Craft (Weaponsmithing). There's no built in rules to prevent that. But we're assuming a sane DM and players who aren't planning to break not only encounters but the entire campaign setting.

Icewalker
2007-09-13, 01:21 AM
I find firearms fine, used as such:

Nowhere near advanced enough to revolutionize everything. They do a good bit more damage than greatbow and the like, have less range, natural minus to hit, can break on a fumble, and are quite expensive. The really rich people have slightly better guns, generally pistols with rifled barrels, etc, so they don't break, don't have a minus to hit, and have the same damage.

I'm thinking 1d12, 2d6, 3d4, maybe even 2d8 range damage

TheOOB
2007-09-13, 01:41 AM
Guns work best if you have minion rules, that is enemies that die in one hit no matter how much damage is done. Big guys should be able to take a bunch of bullets, just like how they take a bunch of sword slashes, but minions should be able to be taken down really easy.

Funkyodor
2007-09-13, 03:00 AM
Eh, the minion idea might be good and flavorful, but when have PC's ever had problems with minions. The problems come with big bad monsters and evil guys. I'd say that firearms ignore Armor bonuses derived from non-magical means (Breastplate +1 is a 1 armor bonus) and only Adamantium Armor provides full AC bonus. Also I would have firearms ignore any and all Natural Armor including benefits from Magical means like amulet of natural armor.

As to the technical aspect of the standard firearm, imagine a world were technology and magic make advances at different paces. Magic is on the high and tech is on the low. What would make tech better is a blend of both. Magical functions making technological advances skyrocket. Hmm, standard black powder cannon? No, open a little portal to the fire plane along side a small portal to the water plane and bam, Steam cannon! Small beads of fireball connected to a projectile in a tube and bam, ancient muzzle loaded blunderbuss weapons. Advance some time and neat, more powerfull ammunition held in a null-space magazine machine gun. But just like magic it falls prey to Dispel Magics, Disjunctions, and Anti-magic Fields.

If you want to keep the Alchemy theme, then you could tie in some side effects to keeps things interesting. Thunderstone and smoke stick eqivalent every shot in space immediately infront of the firer. And if you are doing the one or two full round action reloads, the smokestick effect should provide some degree of concealment to compensate. You could also incorporate a swift action attack option (kinda like hip shot) at an attack penalty to help mitigate the reload time.

Just my 2c.

Feralgeist
2007-09-13, 03:48 AM
This just keeps coming up over and over!


Just use Iron Kingdoms rule for guns. It works. well.

TheThan
2007-09-13, 12:31 PM
That’s a very good idea. (never had the opportunity to look at them myself but I play warmachine)

You could also go and find a copy of D20 modern-past, IIRC it has rules for muskets and such.

blacksabre
2007-09-13, 12:50 PM
Slug Throwers
Simple rules to keep it simple but even..

Requires exotic feat
Reload requiire (fire every other round)
Ammunition..requires special crafting feat and components..can be expensive


Damage
Small Caliber= 2d8 (damage is Fort DC or get proned for 1D2 Rounds)
Range Increment 10 feet

Med Caliber= 2d10 (damage is Fort DC or get proned for 1D3 Rounds)
Range Increment 15 feet

High Caliber= 4d6 (damage is Fort DC or get proned for 1D4 Rounds)
Range Increment 20 feet

Shotgun one shot per round, two barrels-1 round reload
Grapeshot 4d6 (damage is Fort DC or get proned for 1D4 Rounds)
For HollyWood..Reflex DC or knockback in inches equal to damage
10 foot cone

Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick
2007-09-13, 12:54 PM
Quick note, as I haven't seen them mentioned; Ptolus contains a number of reasonably well-balanced Firearms, including the rather fun Hydra and Chimera rifles; some magical properties allow the character to utilize the weapons to full-attack, if needed.

Hawriel
2007-09-13, 09:31 PM
ok to thoughs who think guns blackpoweder or other wise would be power gaming.


A gun in D&D should not work mutch differently than a crossbow. It even has the same hinderinses. Wind and Water. that right there is the great equilizer to blackpowder, or smokeless if you use it. Untill fulmenated mercury was used as an egniter guns where usless when ever some one mentioned the word rain. For that reason alone there should be no problem. Second reason. SPARKS. black powder held in an enclosed space. IF the characters deside to store alot of powder well, having a sword fight in the middle of the armory can be dangerios. ok lot of if ands or buts in that reason but it holds up well enough. Oh and even for the high and mighty British army a matchlock or flint lock had a good chance of not firing at all, or explode in the users face. Sorry Bob you just rolled a critical failer.


Magic missile, fire ball, call lightning, burning hands, cloud kill, ect ect ect and wands rods and staves that do the same thing. if a black powder pistol that does what D8 or D10 damage same as an arrow over balances your game, well I say dont tell the wizard. Guns if you think about it are alot more trouble for a D&D character than their worth. so what if they make grinades, how mutch powder do the characters have on hand? how many grinades can they carry? is it raining, did somthing really bad happen and there powder got wet? UMM oh crap the enemy wizard just cast fire ball, what are the secondary effects of fire and lightning spells? To a person with a powder horn the word BOOM comes to mind. I would also if I was DMing no reflex save for exploding powder on your person.

I pritty mutch house ruled guns into my friends games, Im the only one who uses them and really its just a fluff for fun weapon.

A standard flint lock musket (with training) fire every fourth round. With rapped reload or the enovations of the percusion cap, and paiper cartridge decrease the time to every other round. if you have both evry round. I also upped the damage. A pistole does a D12 a musket 2D8. Simple reason. A gun should do more damage than an arrow. An arrow even with a broad head more or less goes strate in. A solf lead ball fired at a low mussle velosity does nasty things when it hits. Range. point blank -0 short -1 med -3 Long -5 ex -8. they are smooth bore weapons after all. An exotic weapon prof firearms should be used. This should cover using the weapon in melee as well. pritty mutch the same (for D&D) as using a staff or spear. Of corse you want a bayonet, just think of it as a long spear D8 damage and call it a day.

any way Thanix, for fun I would say put your campain world in a sorta renasonce period. when heavy arms and armor are being fased out for lighter weapons becouse of the increasing use of fire arms. of corse you could always go pirat :smallwink: Google early firearms compare matchlocks, flint locks, and US civil war weapons.

ArmorArmadillo
2007-09-14, 01:46 AM
I don't understand something at all...
People always feel the need to have all sorts of byzantine rules when dealing with guns:
Special proficiencies, special ACs, ability damage based on hit locations, special damage penalties bonuses based on range, etc...
Theoretically, it is to mimic the realism of combat: but all weapons should function with those physics. They don't because it makes combat complicated in an unpleasant way. Guns shouldn't be the only weapon in a setting that follow the rules of physics.


Also: Guns should not do more damage than other weapons. Early tech guns were rarely even deadly, they were far more likely to kill people through untreated infections than grevious wounds like a sword or mace would.
Guns should do damage roughly equivalent to arrows or bolts; granted its different with modern tech when you have weapons like SOCOMs, AK-47s and Magnums, but that is not flintlocks.
They shouldn't do more damage just because they're "higher tech and therefore better."

Also, any weapon that requires more than an move action to reload is useless, no matter how much damage it does. (Okay, obviously if it did 10d8 it would be worthwhile, but you know what I mean)

kpenguin
2007-09-14, 01:50 AM
Also, any weapon that requires more than an move action to reload is useless, no matter how much damage it does. (Okay, obviously if it did 10d8 it would be worthwhile, but you know what I mean)

I wouldn't say useless. You could fire it to do the large amount of damage and then draw another weapon.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-14, 02:10 AM
As long as we are talking about people's rules concerning firearms, here are mine:

Reload times:
It takes a skill check to reload a muzzle-loading firearm. I used craft: munitions, so that gun users wouldn't have to buy two skills.
It takes 10 successful DC 10 skill checks, as full-round actions, to reload the firearm. Each increment of 5 above 10 counted as an extra round of reload time.

This makes using guns rather rediculous, but they eventually came across better gun technology, up to revolvers and repeating rifles (which used the same skill check, but a 10 reloaded 1 bullet, and each increment of 5 was another bullet reloaded).

A natural 1 on the skill check indicated a gun jam, unless the loader had 5 ranks in craft munitions.

Damage:
Base DMG gun damage

Armor Piercing:
Guns do better against armor, so I gave them the "Armor Piercing" trait:
Guns have a +1 to hit vs. light armor, a +2 to hit vs. medium armor, and a +3 to hit vs. heavy armor. They also have a +1 to hit vs. shields.

Composite bows for a +6 strength or higher gain this quality as well, and for 2,700gp, this quality could be added to any weapon that deals piercing damage.

EDIT- Also, any armor with a hardness of 20 or greater was immune to Armor Piercing. So, adamantine armor, +3 or higher mithral, or +5 steel armor.

ArmorArmadillo
2007-09-14, 12:52 PM
As long as we are talking about people's rules concerning firearms, here are mine:

Reload times:
It takes a skill check to reload a muzzle-loading firearm. I used craft: munitions, so that gun users wouldn't have to buy two skills.
It takes 10 successful DC 10 skill checks, as full-round actions, to reload the firearm. Each increment of 5 above 10 counted as an extra round of reload time.

This makes using guns rather rediculous, but they eventually came across better gun technology, up to revolvers and repeating rifles (which used the same skill check, but a 10 reloaded 1 bullet, and each increment of 5 was another bullet reloaded).

A natural 1 on the skill check indicated a gun jam, unless the loader had 5 ranks in craft munitions.

Damage:
Base DMG gun damage

Armor Piercing:
Guns do better against armor, so I gave them the "Armor Piercing" trait:
Guns have a +1 to hit vs. light armor, a +2 to hit vs. medium armor, and a +3 to hit vs. heavy armor. They also have a +1 to hit vs. shields.

Composite bows for a +6 strength or higher gain this quality as well, and for 2,700gp, this quality could be added to any weapon that deals piercing damage.

EDIT- Also, any armor with a hardness of 20 or greater was immune to Armor Piercing. So, adamantine armor, +3 or higher mithral, or +5 steel armor.
10 rounds? That's ridiculous. Basically, you've said to players: Carry 10 pistols and abuse quickdraw.

As for armor piercing: With the exception of plate armor, most armors can't withstand pretty much any type of weapon blow. Swords pierce chainmail, maces ignore it entirely, and any arrows fired at close range will go straight through leather and chain.

MrNexx
2007-09-14, 04:28 PM
10 rounds? That's ridiculous. Basically, you've said to players: Carry 10 pistols and abuse quickdraw.

That's not an uncommon strategy, however.

You seen "War Stories" from Firefly? If not, shame on you, and watch the series immediately. However, they're going into a heavy combat situation, and the advice given is "You have six shots. Once it's done, drop it and draw another one."

horseboy
2007-09-14, 04:46 PM
That's not an uncommon strategy, however.

You seen "War Stories" from Firefly? If not, shame on you, and watch the series immediately. However, they're going into a heavy combat situation, and the advice given is "You have six shots. Once it's done, drop it and draw another one."

Yeah. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff5DlpZiMZ0&mode=related&search=) Even with modern firearms, it's not that bad an idea. Besides, that's why the bottom of the grips on old pistols were heavy and metal too, you shot them as they came at you then pistol whipped the holy crap out of them as they came in. Or had the gun built into a mace.

ArmorArmadillo
2007-09-14, 08:43 PM
That's not an uncommon strategy, however.

You seen "War Stories" from Firefly? If not, shame on you, and watch the series immediately. However, they're going into a heavy combat situation, and the advice given is "You have six shots. Once it's done, drop it and draw another one."

Which makes for kind of messy combat however...and balances really badly when magic weapons come into play.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-14, 08:48 PM
meh, I say to you. Only 1 party member had an interest in guns anyway, and he wound up dual-wielding revolvers with spell-storing ammo by the end of it. And it's not like +1-4 to hit vs. armor is terribly significant.