[4e] Cannons?

[Guinea Anubis]

Not sure if I missed them, but is there rules for something like ship mounted cannons?

[dsmiles]

Not yet. I'm working on some homebrew firearms and siege weapons, if you're not in a hurry.

[Guinea Anubis]

Kind of but not really. It will be for ship to ship combat.

[bosssmiley]

Treat as fireball, or as giant thrown rock. Job done.

(does 4E have rules for ballistae yet? Or are giant grapnel-shooting crossbows considered unfun? )

[dsmiles]

Kind of but not really. It will be for ship to ship combat.

Meh. Ship cannons, at the time, were pretty much the same as siege cannons. Just, you know, on a boat...

EDIT: Also, I just did some quick research, and a 16th century English cannon had a maximum effective range of approximately 760 meters (2493 ft), or about 498 squares. So I would stat it out as follows:

Pistol – Proficiency: +2; Damage: 2d6; Range: 10/20; Price: 150 g.p.; Weight: 2 lb.; Group: Firearms; Properties: Load Move. (Superior Ranged)

Rifle – Proficiency: +3; Damage: 2d10; Range: 30/60; Price: 300 g.p.; Weight: 8 lb.; Group: Firearms; Properties: Load Standard. (Superior Ranged)

Cannon - Proficiency: +2; Damage: 5d6; Range: 250/500; Price: 2,000 g.p.; Weight: 1,500 lb.; Group: Siege Weaponry; Properties: Blast 2, Load Full. (Superior Ranged)

I'm just sayin'.

[rayne_dragon]

I suspect you could sort of treat them like a trap or special terrain, but I think you'd still have to write most of the rules up yorself.

[dsmiles]

Also, jump on over to homebrews, if you want to see what I'm doing with firearms.

[Guinea Anubis]

will do, thanks

[Asbestos]

I'd treat a cannon like a magical item with it's own unique power, that way you avoid twin striking with a 24 pounder.

[Artanis]

I'd treat a cannon like a magical item with it's own unique power, that way you avoid twin striking with a 24 pounder.

I dunno. A single shot of 5d6 really isn't that much better than a Twin Strike with a bow. I'd expect something a bit more impressive out of a cannon

[Gralamin]

I would treat a cannon as a rechargeable terrain power. It would take a move and minor to grab a recharge the cannon (Pick up cannon ball and load it), and would cost a standard to fire, so you must use all your actions in a turn to use one. It would attack an area burst 1 at Level+3 vs Reflex, and deal 5d10 + one-half level damage. On a miss it would deal half damage, and it would have an effect to make the terrain it hit difficult terrain (For non-ships), or a hole (for ships)

[Asbestos]

I dunno. A single shot of 5d6 really isn't that much better than a Twin Strike with a bow. I'd expect something a bit more impressive out of a cannon

Yes, then you Twin Strike using the Cannon instead of a bow. So long as you're loaded before you fire powers ignore reloading. So, you use a power with the cannon and do 2[W] damage or 10d6 damage.


I'm liking Grams way.

[DabblerWizard]

(1) Convince a DM that you can store cannons in your pockets

(2) Make sure you have the feat Quick Draw

(3) Win

[Kurald Galain]

EDIT: Also, I just did some quick research, and a 16th century English cannon had a maximum effective range of approximately 760 meters (2493 ft), or about 498 squares.

Bear in mind that bows and crossbows have a significantly shorter range in 4E than they do in real life; this should probably apply to cannon as well.

Cannonball
Range 20, burst 2, target each creature in burst.
+20 v Fort
Hit: 3d10 damage, and the target is dazed (save ends)
Miss: Half damage
Effect: The target is deafened until the end of the encounter, and falls prone.

[Mr. Mud]

+20 fort seems a little low, for my tastes.

For a big mounted canon on a ship, I'd go something like

+23 vs. Fort
6d8
Range: 30

[Asbestos]

Funny thing, since flying creatures don't have higher defenses than non-flyers of their level... Any ranged weapon is a good anti-air weapon, including ye olde ship cannon.

[DragonBaneDM]

I love how much speculation we're getting on 4e modern stuff lately.

Hey, just for fun, what do you guys think a Krupp gun would deal? :P 5d10?

[dsmiles]

Bear in mind that bows and crossbows have a significantly shorter range in 4E than they do in real life; this should probably apply to cannon as well.

I'm fixing that in my campaign world as well. I like my weapons a little more historically accurate (except for damage, because a crossbow bolt would go straight through plate armour...)

[Kurald Galain]

I'm fixing that in my campaign world as well. I like my weapons a little more historically accurate (except for damage, because a crossbow bolt would go straight through plate armour...)

That's a good point, but if you change that then you should probably also increase the defensive bonuses granted by e.g. cover, shields, and dropping prone, because otherwise a squad of longbowmen will totally massacre anything level-appropriate that comes near.

[dsmiles]

That's a good point, but if you change that then you should probably also increase the defensive bonuses granted by e.g. cover, shields, and dropping prone, because otherwise a squad of longbowmen will totally massacre anything level-appropriate that comes near.

In medieval warfare, that's basically how it worked. The archers formed a line, and arced their shots in. Frontal cover was relatively useless, and dropping prone just means that you present a bigger area to get pincushioned. If someone is smart enough to wear, say, a helmet, they may get a defensive bonus, and a shield will provide a cover bonus (but not total cover, unless it's a tower shield). Hiding behind a rock = nada, zip, zero, zilch. I also use hex-shaped grids and facing during combat. Shield left = no shield bonus on the right. I like a little more gritty realism in my games, hence higher technology levels (gunpowder, guins, cannons, satchel charges, etc.). But not too much, mind you (magic, lower damages, non-armor-piercing crossbows, etc.)

[dsmiles]

I dunno. A single shot of 5d6 really isn't that much better than a Twin Strike with a bow. I'd expect something a bit more impressive out of a cannon

Yeah, but Twin Strike isn't a blast 2 area of effect, cannons are.

[Kurald Galain]

In medieval warfare, that's basically how it worked.

The point is that using big shields (as you suggest) would make a big difference in reality, but give only a tiny bonus in 4E. Like I said, defensive bonuses need to be bigger.

[Artanis]

In medieval warfare, that's basically how it worked.

As an example of this, there's always good ol' Agincourt

Yeah, but Twin Strike isn't a blast 2 area of effect, cannons are.

...I'm really starting to regret saying that.

Yes, the cannon is stronger than a bow. Yes, the cannon does more damage than even a Twin Strike. Yes, it's a blast 2. Yes, it works out overall. Yes, I'll take everybody's word for it that it's more or less balanced. That's not what I was responding to.

I was responding to the "don't want them Twin Striking" with it because I thought he meant in terms of pure, single-target damage output. It always seemed like being shot by a cannon should be a bit more than a ~50% increase in damage than being shot by two arrows.

[Kurald Galain]

It always seemed like being shot by a cannon should be a bit more than a ~50% increase in damage than being shot by two arrows.

Okay, okay.

Cannon blast (pirate daily 15)
Standard action, range 20
Attack: +20 v fort
Hit: the target is dead (save ends)

Better?