Spelljammer - gunfighter

[Moriato]

I'm going to be in a 3.5 Spelljammer game coming up soon, and I was interested in making a character who uses a pistol as his main weapon, Spelljammer being one of the only settings where it could be thematically appropriate. The problem, of course, is that in d&d guns just aren't very good.

In his source material (Polyhedron magazine) it lists a pistol as being one shot, and taking a standard action to reload. I suppose we might adapt rapid reload to work with firearms, but I'm not sure how that would work, as it normally turns a move action into a free action (light crossbows) or a full round action into a move action (heavy crossbows), there's no standard action reload to go off of.

There's also a "spitter gun" that works like a repeating crossbow but that just doesn't quite fit the image I have for this character. I may wind up going with that, but I'm hoping you guys might know of some feats (other than the standard rapid reload, rapid shot, point blank shot, etc), prestige classes (other than this one), magic items or whatever that might help out a gunfighter.

[SilverClawShift]

Well, I have to pimp my groups material I suppose.

If it's spelljammer (and really, anything can fit in spelljammer), you could take a peak at the Spellshot Pistol in my sig.

[Another_Poet]

Iron Kingdoms campaign setting has great rules for D&D guns. They have a free pdf download that explains the basics, which I can no longer find on their website (recently redesigned) but if you ask in their forums I'm sure someone can get it to you.

[Hotpies]

Have you considered just carrying a bunch of pistols? Drawing and firing would be faster than reloading and firing.

[Sinfire Titan]

Have you considered just carrying a bunch of pistols? Drawing and firing would be faster than reloading and firing.

Too bad Iaijutsu doesn't apply to guns. That would make for an interesting battle.

[Attilargh]

Iron Kingdoms campaign setting has great rules for D&D guns.

The Iron Kingdoms rules, especially the ones for firearms, are utter rubbish. Looking at the numbers, I honestly can't fathom what the designers were thinking when they decided this nonsense was an acceptable representation for guns in a setting where pretty much everyone and their dog is packing heat.

[Another_Poet]

The Iron Kingdoms rules, especially the ones for firearms, are utter rubbish. Looking at the numbers, I honestly can't fathom what the designers were thinking when they decided this nonsense was an acceptable representation for guns in a setting where pretty much everyone and their dog is packing heat.

I guess they were thinking, "Gee, do you think our rulebooks are good enough to become the most popular non-WotC campaign setting for 3rd Edition and win a slew of Ennies?"

And the answer is yes.

Few people pack heat in IK, due to the cost of firearms and powder. Some adventurers and many soldiers carry them, however.

They are at the stage of gunnery that the real world went through in the early 1700s. Anyone can use them but they take training to use rapidly without jamming/misfiring. They do lots of damage but are slow to reload.

It works pretty well, both as a representation of early guns in an early modern setting, and as a justifiable investment for PCs who want powerful one-shot attacks.

[Attilargh]

I guess they were thinking, "Gee, do you think our rulebooks are good enough to become the most popular non-WotC campaign setting for 3rd Edition and win a slew of Ennies?"

The campaign setting is made of awesome and win, and is the reason I bought the Guides. The rules inside are mostly forgettable, and in some instances quite rubbish.

Also, I'd like to point out that the Iron Kingdoms books have won ENnies mostly for the art, writing and setting, never the rules. (Well, the first Monsternomicon won silver for the best monster supplement.) The Character Guide hasn't gotten anything better than an honourable mention, and even then only for the cover art.

They do lots of damage but are slow to reload.

It works pretty well, both as a representation of early guns in an early modern setting, and as a justifiable investment for PCs who want powerful one-shot attacks.

Bolding mine. The military rifle, the trusty weapon of the Cygnaran Trenchers, is a frankly pathetic weapon that deals 2d8 damage every third round and costs ten to twelve gold pieces to fire once. The enemy needs to have an AC of "The DM Is Certifiably Off His Rocker" for the average damage to beat something as simple as the longbow over a few turns.

But hey, the military rifle's not all that good if you want one-shot killing power. For that, let's look at the Vanar Liberator's damage die. All 2d8+2 of it. Most impressive. Also costs 6 gp more to shoot, but hey, that's petty good for what is essentially half a +2 bullet.

So how about that availability. You bring up the good point that very few people can actually afford the guns, and I can't but agree. After all, the military rifle costs two thirds of a second-level character's expected wealth! This makes little enough sense when looking at what you actually get out of the gun, and outright boggles the mind when you consider that Iron Kingdoms is reputedly a low-level setting.

Yet it's plainly obvious that the designers intended the player characters to actually own and use firearms. I mean, just look at the Guides' covers! Inside, any armed character has a fair chance of having a gun or three with them, and even the homepage touts the setting as "a place where steam power and gunpowder meet sword and sorcery".

This might all be very realistic, but I'll be damned if it makes any actual sense.