If any one has the cost and stats of a rifle to hand, i would be very greatful to know them.
Well which rifle are you looking for? I imagine there are several available from different sources (though only one Pathfinder one obviously)If any one has the cost and stats of a rifle to hand, i would be very greatful to know them.
Well in an ideal world i would demand you jump forwards in time and return with the fire arms rules from the new version of the campaign setting. However, sticking with what is possible, please could i have the pathfinder chronicles campaign setting rules.
Rifle 3,000 gp 1d8 19–20/x3, range 150 ft., capacity 1, 8 lb., Bludgeoning and piercing
well damn. Their goes the rifle slinger inquisitor idea out the window. Back to the drawing board.
|
I really hated the firearms from the campaign guide. I don't understand why in every fantasy RPG the moment firearms come out they have to break all the conventions and give them special rules- in this case exploding damage dice...
I think I ended up boosting the base damage of firearms and house ruling a feat to make full attacking with a rifle possible, but I can't honestly remember.
Any weapon that does 19-20x3 has potential though...
I really hated the firearms from the campaign guide. I don't understand why in every fantasy RPG the moment firearms come out they have to break all the conventions and give them special rules- in this case exploding damage dice...
I think I ended up boosting the base damage of firearms and house ruling a feat to make full attacking with a rifle possible, but I can't honestly remember.
Any weapon that does 19-20x3 has potential though...
Also dislike the exploding crit range.... mainly due to the fact that once you get it a little more advanced... were you have 6 shot, 8 shot, 12 shot, 15 shot payloads... over time, they need for the extra crit is not needed.
Having a hand gun with 6 shoots, were a full BAB fighter/Ranger can get off 5 shoots per round, and a Rapid Reload feat, slips in a new 6 cartridge.
Make hand guns a "Simple" weapon and you just explained why they replaced bows.
......
Oh well guess they will follow the old trend, and i can look forward to a Remington Magnum, for 1d10 damage with 15-20/x4 damage in the future.
|
If any one has the cost and stats of a rifle to hand, i would be very greatful to know them.
If you're interested, I've got half a dozen+ rifles in my setting. Check out pages 6-8 in the Rhune: Dawn of Twilight Character Primer ((it's a free download, btw) for stats on several rifles.
You can find it here.
http://www.rhunedawnoftwilight.com/library.html
If any one has the cost and stats of a rifle to hand, i would be very greatful to know them.
If you're interested, I've got half a dozen+ rifles in my setting. Check out pages 6-8 in the Rhune: Dawn of Twilight Character Primer ((it's a free download, btw) for stats on several rifles.
You can find it here.
http://www.rhunedawnoftwilight.com/library.html
Hi Jason, just thought you might like to know your website is black-listed by pretty much all of my anti-spyware and sercurity programs. Dunno if its just cause of certificate issues or something that was posted up on their, but it was the first time I'd seen high-risk bad website alerts in ages!
Not saying its your fault, just saying you might want to look into it a bit.
Why did powder replace bowstrings?
Certainly the noise, the fire and the smoke terrifying opponents had something to do with it. It surely wasn't the effectiveness of arquebus and other early firearms!
Or maybe it is because the projectile slams *through* most armor?
Or would ignoring armor be too difficult a mechanic? Yeah, let's leave ranged touch attacks to the Casters ;)
GNOME
If any one has the cost and stats of a rifle to hand, i would be very greatful to know them.
If you're interested, I've got half a dozen+ rifles in my setting. Check out pages 6-8 in the Rhune: Dawn of Twilight Character Primer ((it's a free download, btw) for stats on several rifles.
You can find it here.
http://www.rhunedawnoftwilight.com/library.html
I recently downloaded this file after reading a couple or reviews in the steampunk thread. I really like it. As a world, it is still missing something for me, not certain what, but I will probably make my next campaign there.
Overall, it is still better than alot of things I have paid for, and I truly appreciate your time and effort on it.
I especially like your bard's introduction to the handbook. I hope to see more of her. ( as in more of her dialogues or even a short story, not as in more pics :) )
Greg
|
I really hated the firearms from the campaign guide. I don't understand why in every fantasy RPG the moment firearms come out they have to break all the conventions and give them special rules- in this case exploding damage dice...
I think I ended up boosting the base damage of firearms and house ruling a feat to make full attacking with a rifle possible, but I can't honestly remember.
Any weapon that does 19-20x3 has potential though...
Also dislike the exploding crit range.... mainly due to the fact that once you get it a little more advanced... were you have 6 shot, 8 shot, 12 shot, 15 shot payloads... over time, they need for the extra crit is not needed.
Having a hand gun with 6 shoots, were a full BAB fighter/Ranger can get off 5 shoots per round, and a Rapid Reload feat, slips in a new 6 cartridge.
Make hand guns a "Simple" weapon and you just explained why they replaced bows.
......
Oh well guess they will follow the old trend, and i can look forward to a Remington Magnum, for 1d10 damage with 15-20/x4 damage in the future.
It wasn't firearms that spelled the end of the bow, it was the crossbow, which every peasant could be armed with. Even though D&D doesn't factor it in, crossbows are ridiculously good and punching holes through heavy armor.
-Uriel
Or maybe it is because the projectile slams *through* most armor?
Or would ignoring armor be too difficult a mechanic? Yeah, let's leave ranged touch attacks to the Casters ;)
Nah. I houseruled muskets in my campaign to do base damage of 3d6, 18-20/x3, against touch AC. No, Sir Winsalot, your plate armor won't help you against this particular opponent...
I also houseruled the Crossbowman template in the APG to be applicable to a musket-focused build as well. That, combined with the touch-attack benefit, nicely counterbalanced the slow reload time.
Why did powder replace bowstrings?
Because it takes about 10 minutes to train a moron peasant to shoot a blunderbuss and a lifetime to train him to use a longbow. Same reason most everybody but the British and Japanese used crossbows instead of longbows.
Arrows and bolts slammed through most armor, too, you know.
3d6 damage and 18-20 crit and Touch AC.... ouch. Ya that would be the end of Bows, Crossbow, and Sword, Dagger, Axes, hammers etc....
.
Handguns (simple weapon)
1d6 damage crit 20/x3 and Is treated as a Touch Attack....should be plenty of an advantage. Give them 1-15 payload. Two-hand move action to reload.
Rifles (martial weapon)
1d8 damage crit 20/x3 and is treated as a Touch Attack. 1-30 payload. Two-hand move action to reload.
I use Iron Kingdoms firearms rules, with one minor and one substancial changes.
Rfiles ranged from 2d6 to 2d8 (militar ones), 19-20/x3, 5-12 PO each ammunition.
My changes: Rifles are martial weapons (pistols being common), and any firearm require a standard action to recharge (rapid reload to move).
Also, you can take a feat for DEX in the damage for any weapon that can shoot no more than once per round (rifles, pistols and crossbow, but no bow or revolvers). Should add that is pretty common to obtain DR against piercing (firearms damage). Just buy an armored greatcoat. Below 100 PO you can get as much as DR 5/bludgeoning.
3d6 damage and 18-20 crit and Touch AC.... ouch. Ya that would be the end of Bows, Crossbow, and Sword, Dagger, Axes, hammers etc....
.
Handguns (simple weapon)
1d6 damage crit 20/x3 and Is treated as a Touch Attack....should be plenty of an advantage. Give them 1-15 payload. Two-hand move action to reload.Rifles (martial weapon)
1d8 damage crit 20/x3 and is treated as a Touch Attack. 1-30 payload. Two-hand move action to reload.
Well, I counterweighted it by requiring exotic weapon proficiency for it, since the matter of caring for and reloading a black powder weapon is pretty challenging for those who don't know how. By comparison, a sword or a club are much easier to use. (Hell, so is a revolver or even a cartridge rifle.)
Also, it takes two full-round actions to reload... I think. I need to go back and look at my house rules.
Why did powder replace bowstrings?
Certainly the noise, the fire and the smoke terrifying opponents had something to do with it. It surely wasn't the effectiveness of arquebus and other early firearms!
Or maybe it is because the projectile slams *through* most armor?
Or would ignoring armor be too difficult a mechanic? Yeah, let's leave ranged touch attacks to the Casters ;)
GNOME
Honestly early firearms did jack all to armor -- in fact most people that could afford the armor didn't buy it unless it was firearm tested first.
Honestly early firearms did jack all to armor -- in fact most people that could afford the armor didn't buy it unless it was firearm tested first.Why did powder replace bowstrings?
Certainly the noise, the fire and the smoke terrifying opponents had something to do with it. It surely wasn't the effectiveness of arquebus and other early firearms!
Or maybe it is because the projectile slams *through* most armor?
Or would ignoring armor be too difficult a mechanic? Yeah, let's leave ranged touch attacks to the Casters ;)
GNOME
+1, It's a common misconception that early firearms replaced the bow and crossbow because it punched easier through armor while bolts and arrows did that just as well, if not even better than most early firearms.
In fact early firearms were generally novelities more than weapons -- the gunpowder powered weaponry of the era was the cannon -- and even that was considered dangerous to user as much as enemy. It wasn't until much later that firearms developed into something that could be used regularly -- and in many ways the fact they got developed was due strictly to the "promise" the showed more than anything else (much like many modern developments of technology).
|
In fact early firearms were generally novelities more than weapons -- the gunpowder powered weaponry of the era was the cannon -- and even that was considered dangerous to user as much as enemy. It wasn't until much later that firearms developed into something that could be used regularly -- and in many ways the fact they got developed was due strictly to the "promise" the showed more than anything else (much like many modern developments of technology).
This is a pretty relative argument. I'm sure that 'early' bows were pretty crap when compared to a well thrown spear.
If you're comparing a blunderbuss to a bow, that's one thing. But you don't have to advance the time line very far at all for the balance to start to swing the other-way.
In fact early firearms were generally novelities more than weapons -- the gunpowder powered weaponry of the era was the cannon -- and even that was considered dangerous to user as much as enemy. It wasn't until much later that firearms developed into something that could be used regularly -- and in many ways the fact they got developed was due strictly to the "promise" the showed more than anything else (much like many modern developments of technology).This is a pretty relative argument. I'm sure that 'early' bows were pretty crap when compared to a well thrown spear.
If you're comparing a blunderbuss to a bow, that's one thing. But you don't have to advance the time line very far at all for the balance to start to swing the other-way.
Bows were fortunately one of those weapons where you could immediately see the improvement -- unlike firearms which continued to have issues well pass the 300 year mark of their discovery. Heck they weren't even reported for penetrating armor until 200 years after they had been in 'use' in europe. "Handcannons" were barely functioning for most of this time prone to all the problems that the bow had plus some(took training, wet weather tended to ruin the powder and fuse, were harder to aim, etc). If it weren't for people hoping for siege engine power in a man portable form the gun wouldn't have been developed.
Even as late as the 1700's guns were known for being inaccurate (dueling pistols were more of a case of "stand and fire until someone gets lucky or we go back to the swords) and most gun deaths are more correctly attributable to poor medical practices than the deadliness of a gun.
Bows were fortunately one of those weapons where you could immediately see the improvement -- unlike firearms which continued to have issues well pass the 300 year mark of their discovery. Heck they weren't even reported for penetrating armor until 200 years after they had been in 'use' in europe. "Handcannons" were barely functioning for most of this time prone to all the problems that the bow had plus some(took training, wet weather tended to ruin the powder and fuse, were harder to aim, etc). If it weren't for people hoping for siege engine power in a man portable form the gun wouldn't have been developed.
Even as late as the 1700's guns were known for being inaccurate (dueling pistols were more of a case of "stand and fire until someone gets lucky or we go back to the swords) and most gun deaths are more correctly attributable to poor medical practices than the deadliness of a gun.
Interesting. I hadn't know that, but definitely worth taking into account -- perhaps by lowering the range increment on them, at least in my house rules. That way, bows and the like may be more reliable at long range, but close up they'll be quite potentially dangerous.
Wow, lots of variations on the rules here....
I think the problem is, are you looking for a " the times they are ah change-in" gun that can cut down seasoned adventurers in a single shot, or just another sort of weapon that just happens to shoot small projectiles.
Dwarves in my Gameworld have guns, I've got cannons, Pistols and riflemen depending on the area. They've actually been around for a while. The reason I give as to why those nations/groups with guns haven't taken over the world are "Sparks" ( read: PCs or NPCs with class levels). About 1 in 500 people are sparks, they dont live very long, and tend to go out in blazes of glory, but all the lore points to one thing.... they're tough. The more balanced riffles up there ( or at least balanced with other weapons) does around 1d8 damage. that's about the damage of a longbow. think about at lower levels.... yeah, a good longbow shot will kill most things with 1hd... that's why we have goblins. However at higher levels, the fighter can take a direct hit from a mook's longbow and laugh it off.
so yeah, honestly depends on what feeling you're going for. as a DM , I'd go with a more balance friendly one, just to prevent being overpowered.
Well, I counterweighted it by requiring exotic weapon proficiency for it, since the matter of caring for and reloading a black powder weapon is pretty challenging for those who don't know how. By comparison, a sword or a club are much easier to use. (Hell, so is a revolver or even a cartridge rifle.)
Note, was talking about revolver's and cartride rifle.... Why i said handguns instead of musket. (not all campaign are set in the past). Why i also listed payloads as 1-15 and 1-30, because i was talking about ammo clips being used.
.............
Unless your using exploding bullets, you would even be making a smaller hole than an arrow.
The advantage of a handgun over a sword is.... Range, Rate of Fire, Easy to Use, and Armor Penetration -- which did not become true until gun-cotton was created in the Late 1880's.
................
"Heavy Armor" went out of fashion because, Crossbows, Longbows, and Pikemen create a world, were even commoners could take down fully armored knights.
"Heavy Armor" was to expensive to buy, keep, and maintain; only rich people could afford it. You were slow, hot, need help putting the armor on, and could only fight for short duration before becoming exhausted.
"Heavy Armor" was more of a status symbol to show wealth, power, and your rank as nobility, land ownership, and ceremonial decoration (much as a dress uniform is worn today).
Well, for one thing, long swords really can't cut people in half. Those pesky bones get in the way. Executioners usually used axes (and guillotines are essentially automated axes), and even then, it often took multiple swings -- and that's cutting through the thinnest area covering the spinal cord. A one-handed sword will not cut a person in half.
Additionally, you don't need to cut a person in half to damage them critically. In fact, punctures are more likely to kill than slashes, both short and long term.
Ok, here is how i think a old time hand musket should be written up.
Hand Musket (3 musketeer area)
Martial Weapon (due to having to know how do handy gunpowder)
Damage: (S 1d3) (M 1d4) Crit 20/x2 Range:50
Rate of Reload: Loading a musket is a 2 move action that require two hands and provokes attacks of opportunity on both rounds, or as a one Full round Action.
Disadvantaged: On a Fumble roll, (natural 1), the musket explodes, doing damage to the shooter instead. Roll for critical damage, to confirm.
Advantage to Musket:
1) Dex and Shield bonus to AC do not apply. The armor AC and Dodge Feat do still apply.
2) Everyone (except shooter); friend and foe alike, within a 25 foot radius of shooter must make a Will Save. Those who fail their save, will be Shaken for remainder of this combat round.
New Feat: Accustom to guns: You have grown up around guns, and used them so much that you are no longer bother by the loud sound and smoke of guns going off. You do not have to make a will save vs being shaken, due to the sound of guns going off.
First off while I mentioned earlier that guns were dangerous to the user the actual chance that they'll explode was never that high (5%) -- it was more likely they would simply jam or otherwise not operate when they were supposed to leaving you in a dangerous situation (a jammed/not working gun) in the middle of a dangerous situation (a battle).
While load times are a problem with early guns I have seen people (trained of course) reload them with great speed and skill such that I believe the rapid reload feat for black powder weapons should be allowed to achieve something near a full attack.
The supersonic guns that we are use to are a "fairly" new thing in the realm of firearms and as such the inability to dodge bullets to some extent is fairly new. Also it is still (and probably always will be) more difficult to shoot someone that is moving rapidly (and skillfully) than it will be to shoot someone that isn't -- wooden shields will provide some ability to stop bullets still (as will metal shields) as it doesn't take too much to deflect a bullet and save the users life -- yes the shield would be damaged but no more (or less) so than when a different weapon hits it (something that isn't currently covered with the rules).
Honestly early firearms generally did as much damage as other weapons of the time (speaking to the longsword, battle axe, and mace specifically). Modern firearms typically deal more damage through different bullet designs more than through something with the gun specifically, glazer rounds, hollow points, hydroshock rounds and the like are an interesting development in that they are designed specifically to deal damage to targets in ways that early bullets simply couldn't do but both design and material used.
Bullet evolution has done wonders for firearm damage and even with this almost a full 90% of the time if the victim of a gunshot is gotten to medical attention quickly (and I'm talking amublance ride quickly not "30 seconds to live" quickly) the victim will live (generally with little ill effect depending on where shot and what with) -- caliber elitism not withstanding.
Which gun are you talking about
1232: The Chinese who invented gunpowder (black powder) first used it in a weapon - gunpowder filled tubes aka rockets.
1364: First recorded use of a firearm - shooter lit wicks by hand that ingnited gunpowder that was loaded into the gun barrel.
1400s: Matchlock guns - first mechanically firing of guns. Wicks were now attached to a clamp that sprang into gunpowder that was placed in a "flash pan".
1509: Wheel lock guns - wicks were replaced the wheel lock that generated a spark for igniting the gunpowder.
1630: Flintlock guns - the flintlock did two things mechanically, it opened the lid of the flash pan and provided an igniting spark.
1825: Percussion-cap guns invented by Reverend John Forsyth - firing mechanism no longer uses flash pan, a tube lead straight into the gun barrel, the tupe had an exposive cap on it that exploded when struck
1830: Back action lock
1835: Colt revolver - first mass-produced, multi-shot, revolving firearms
1840: Pin-fire cartridges
1850: Shotguns
1859: Full rim-fire cartridge
1860: Spencer repeating carbine patented
1861: Breech loaded guns
1862: Gatling Gun
1869: Center-fire cartridge
1871: Cartridge revolver
1873: Winchester rifle
1877: Double-action revolver
1879: Lee box magazine patented
-------(1880: Gun-Cotton added to ammo, Now Penetrates a bible..aka.. now would penetrates Armor)------
1892: Automatic handguns invented by Joseph Laumann
1893: Borchardt pistol - automatic handgun with a separate magazine in the grip
1903: First automatic rifle a Winchester.
|
|
Overall, it is still better than alot of things I have paid for, and I truly appreciate your time and effort on it.
I especially like your bard's introduction to the handbook. I hope to see more of her. ( as in more of her dialogues or even a short story, not as in more pics :) )
Greg
Thanks Greg. Out of curiosity, which threads? Here on the Paizo boards?
*sigh*
We could go back and forth with this forever.
Ball Ammo, muskets *not* rifles were inacurrate. Enough reason alone to avoid using them. However, at short ranges, it could punch through armor. Past that short range (estimating 50yds) the ball dropped off dramatically in both accuracy and stopping power/penetration.
*Rifles* on the other hand were much better at both range and stopping power (range being in part a function of putting the round where you want it to be...)
Rifles were used by more 'elite' units of sharpshooters until the American Civil War which is where Rifles became more commonplace (though not yet universal). Muskets (smoothbore) were used en mass as a battlefield tool. That is to say, "Pvt Joseph has a musket, everyone else swords." When fired in a mass, in volleys (not everyone shooting simulatneously!) the volume of lead they produced stopped most everything it struck. (But then we could mention the fact that though a company of muskets could shred a sheet 6'x 50' (the facing of an 'enemy' company) but still had 'day long' battles of infantry facing each other working on creating an opportunity for the cavalry (that had forasaken armor as less than useful, and was not thrown into intact blocks of infantry) to exploit, break and pursue to destroy enemy units)
As Oliver pointed out, "Which firearm are we talking about" Handcannons (that the user actually lit a match and applied to the primer) or rifled flintlocks? Because Yes, the extremely primitive handcannon was *useless* when compared to a Bow/Crossbow. However, by the time you see Rifles, and then *especially* by the time you see repeaters (not automatics, but multiple rounds in the weapon's magazine/revolving chambers) armor was all but useless.
I would also like to point out that the divide between "I Like Guns in D&D" and "I Hate Guns in D&D" is vast and impassable. Either you like the idea and are willing to work it out, or you hate the idea and nothing proposed is acceptable.
And the 'quickly' Abraham is refering to is "The Golden Hour" Get a victim to good trauma care in about 60 minutes and chances are very good they will survive. :)
GNOME
Thanks Greg. Out of curiosity, which threads? Here on the Paizo boards?Overall, it is still better than alot of things I have paid for, and I truly appreciate your time and effort on it.
I especially like your bard's introduction to the handbook. I hope to see more of her. ( as in more of her dialogues or even a short story, not as in more pics :) )
Greg
OFF TOPIC REPLY : Steampunk RPG Recomendation thread
I am off to see if I am allowed in Rhune forums now. I can't wait to see some more trait ideas.
Greg
Very well put stuff
Exactly.
Personally I don't mind the era right at the end of the muskets into the rifles as a "golden" zone for firearms in D&D. For me it's a matter of flavor -- if the campaign supports the existance of firearms well then I don't mind them being there... if it's a case of "oh by the way here's a shotgun" then I mind it more.
Something else that has to be decided is what type of firearms do you want -- meaning do you want the Hollywood "blows them back 5 feet" firearms, the "all firearms will kill you dead in one shot!" firearms, something realistic or something that is just as dangerous to the user as the target?
Your choice on this will greatly influence type, era, and mechanics you use for guns in your game.
Something else that has to be decided is what type of firearms do you want -- meaning do you want the Hollywood "blows them back 5 feet" firearms, the "all firearms will kill you dead in one shot!" firearms, something realistic or something that is just as dangerous to the user as the target?
lol. You reminded me of a stituation that happened many years ago in a 2d ed game.
We used most of the supplements available and one of the guys went with a soldier type named Bill, he used a saber and a pistol (from the green bound swashbuckler book). He was in a dungeon and the door burst open, the evil cleric charged into the party (he was in a huff about his Amway delivery being late ;) ). Bill ready-aimed-fired and did exactly 4 points of damage, including the +1 fire damage for the target all but touching the muzzle. Bill was *shocked*. So much so that he never played D&D with us again... "It was unrealistic" Apparently Bill wanted the realistic Hollywood effects ;)
Even funnier: He like Warhammer 40K... lol
GNOME
Even funnier: He like Warhammer 40K... lolGNOME
Has anyone done a d20 bolter stats?
Sorry, person is offering me a cheap Deathwatch copy, and I have 40kRP on my mind alot.
Greg
.
.
Some idea's
Greg-
D20 Bolter? ummm...
We could scale it like so...
S1 = d3
S2 = d4
S3 = d6
S4 = d8
S5 = 2d6
S6 = 2d8
S7 = 4d6
S8 = 4d8
S9 = 6d6
S10= 6d8
Though that scales with PFRPG damage, it feels aenemic at S6+. That is where you start to see "Instant Death Effects" in 40k. so you could push it like so...
S6 = 4d6
S7 = 6d6
S8 = 8d6
S9 = 10d6
S10= 10d8
Now, it gets tougher when you think about how to translate AP value. You could either allow the weapon to become a 'ranged touch attack' but that makes the lowly lasgun pretty wortwhile. What I would do is AP- is no extra bonus. AP6/5 would 'ignore light armor' (Flak, Ork...) but would be fully affected by medium (Carapace, Aspect...) heavy (power armor) and su[er heavy (Terminators and Oblits). AP4 could 'ignore medium' and AP3 ignore heavy. AP2/1 would ignore all armor. AP1 would also ignore Hardness of objects. (hence it's ability to destroy vehicles so effectively)
How would you work Power Weapons? Easy Peasy: if it's a powerweapon, it's a "Brilliant Energy Weapon" Powerfist? +6 to User's Strength, *or* allow it to do 4d8 damage (for example). Chainfist? See Powerfist (however you choose to resolve it) *and* it ignores hardness ;)
Once upon a time I was going to do a d20 "Inquisitor" game ;) I think with just a few tweaks even the PF system would be super easy to convert. ie, Psyker? Yeah, Sorc. :D
GNOME
Gee, gnome, that is awesome!
If you ever follow thru with your Inquisitor idea, please make a thread about it. Though I never was good at 40k, I always appreciated the fluff.
Greg
Sorry for Off topic, just always amazed at the creative juices here on the forums.
Greg-
D20 Bolter? ummm...We could scale it like so...
S1 = d3
S2 = d4
S3 = d6
S4 = d8
S5 = 2d6
S6 = 2d8
S7 = 4d6
S8 = 4d8
S9 = 6d6
S10= 6d8Though that scales with PFRPG damage, it feels aenemic at S6+. That is where you start to see "Instant Death Effects" in 40k. so you could push it like so...
S6 = 4d6
S7 = 6d6
S8 = 8d6
S9 = 10d6
S10= 10d8Now, it gets tougher when you think about how to translate AP value. You could either allow the weapon to become a 'ranged touch attack' but that makes the lowly lasgun pretty wortwhile. What I would do is AP- is no extra bonus. AP6/5 would 'ignore light armor' (Flak, Ork...) but would be fully affected by medium (Carapace, Aspect...) heavy (power armor) and su[er heavy (Terminators and Oblits). AP4 could 'ignore medium' and AP3 ignore heavy. AP2/1 would ignore all armor. AP1 would also ignore Hardness of objects. (hence it's ability to destroy vehicles so effectively)
How would you work Power Weapons? Easy Peasy: if it's a powerweapon, it's a "Brilliant Energy Weapon" Powerfist? +6 to User's Strength, *or* allow it to do 4d8 damage (for example). Chainfist? See Powerfist (however you choose to resolve it) *and* it ignores hardness ;)
Once upon a time I was going to do a d20 "Inquisitor" game ;) I think with just a few tweaks even the PF system would be super easy to convert. ie, Psyker? Yeah, Sorc. :D
GNOME
So does this mean with an S10 = 10d8, i an add Vital Strike + improved Vital Strike + Greater Vital Strike at level 16 Fighter for 40d8 damage ??
*grin*
Sorry about the Off Topic'd stuff...
Let me cut and paste a new Conversion Thread ;)
GNOME
Guns where not great, especially in their early years and there is at least one misconception going around. That is that fire arms are some how easier to use than bows or crossbows.
You can't just spends ten minites showing a militia how to operate a hand gun and leave them too it, you'll be left with a mob who end up being more of a bane than a boon. Hand gun drilling took time, weeks and months to get decent troops, just like crossbow men and just like archers. It is very possible to argue that cross bow drills and gun drills required more training than bows. Britain continued to uses long bows longer than most because it had a citizen army. Every man had a longbow, and every man had to drill with once a week by law. It was a major military asset, providing britain with large a huge pool of potential support troops, while having to maintain a relatively small standing army. This practice changed because the way wars worked changed and because Longbow ownership started to decline.
My understanding of what edged out the longbow(more quickly) and crossbow(less quickly) and ushered in the firearm was the emergance of a new military tactic, the Pike square.
The pike square was such an effective tactic that is changed the land scape of battle field. Large groups of pikemen could decimate other troop types, and defend against the previously dominant cavelry tactics. Even without fire arms these formations ended a military era; crossbows and long bows might well have survived this, if some one hadn't realised that the new fangled firearms, just starting to become effective, synigised well with pike use. Gun users could fit neatly within a pike square, and use their weapons, within the relative close quarters of pike warfare. With the increasing use of such fire arms, they developed more quickly, becoming increasingly accurate, becoming cheaper and more common place. Slowly but surely the pike square lost the pikes all together and the tactive evolved further into the line, column and square of nepoleonic warfare.
|
I am less interested in learning a bunch of new rules about guns and more interested in seeing them put into the existing rules *roughly* as powerful as a composite longbow.
Considering they are an exotic weapon and expensive they deserve that much and if they aren't in the ballpark of composite longbow they will never see play due to the EWP requirement (which is the current state of things).
Other things that would be fun:
I have no problem with muskets as exotic weapons.
but once you get to wild-west, type of hand gun... it should be martial weapon.
and most modern hand guns today would be consider simple weapons. Well simpler than a quarterstaff or dagger to use.
....
Early guns, like muskets should be weak... 1d4 damage 20/x2 crit. Give them ability to by pass armor, or shield, or dex, but weak damage.
Wild-west guns 1d6 damage 20/x3
Moder guns i can see 1d8 19-20/x3
....
After all, a 1d8 gun in the hands of a 16th level fighter (with greater vital strike) should do 4d8 then add in special bullets for +1d8 armor piercing.... Now add in D&D Magic... for a +1 Bane (human) Gun (+8,000 gd)... and now your doing 4d8 (+1 or +3 vs human) +1d8 (+2d6 vs human) per shot..... Full round action x 4 attacks (+1 more with Rapid Shot).... and that is good damage, that can bypass Shield, Armor, and Dex.
|
|
Give them ability to by pass armor, or shield, or dex, but weak damage.
This is exactly the sort of "Guns aren't normal" stuff that I think should be avoided at all costs. The more new rules you introduce as part of firearms the less likely they are to be used at a typical table.
Also, you are basically saying guns should always target AC 10 for size medium which just won't work.
Edit: Just a slight edit to remove a potentially contentious term.
|
|
.
.Some idea's
So wait, this is an attack like a save? What is the save? Bab 1/2 bab 1/2 hit dice? Whats the damage? If it's too low you're better off grabbing a sword, if it's too high you're effectively turning a fighter spell caster by having him grab one of these.
Everyone in a 25 foot radius of shooter, has to make a Will save (except shooter), due to the loud sound. Those who fail there save are "Shaken" for the remainder of that round. === New Feat: Accustom to guns: You have grown up around guns, and used them so much that you are no longer bother by the loud sound and smoke of guns going off. You do not have to make a will save vs being shaken, due to the sound of guns going off.=== Can be added to off set this feature.
No feat tax for something like this. Make it a trait. I shouldn't have to take a feat because one of my party members decided to play with a new mechanic. That is bad game design.
Damage should be keep small = Ball 1d4, Copper jack slug 1d6, Copper jack with gun cotton 1d8. Then if you want to, you could add extra like Exploding +1d4, Exploding Shrapnel +1d6, Armor Piercing +1d8 and no reflex save vs bypassing armor, automatic. The extra's would be military issue and not for local purchase... could find on black market.... depending on local laws. ((example: You got a Copper Jack gun cotten Armor Piercing bullet for 1d8 + 1d8 damage and Armor/Dex/Shield AC does not apply))
At that point you're basically creating the mechanics for a class. Once more I know you're throwing out ideas, but really the problem is when you have to write a book for something so simple as a single weapon, you're breaking of the the very precepts of the game. Keep it Simple.
Range should very between 50 for early models, up to 200 for the very advanced version. Then you could add Scopes for +50, to +100 onto rifles to be a better snipper.
range increments being played with I could see. I understand you are throwing out new mechanics but from the standpoint I see there is no reason to implement some of them, unless you want to recreate the 3.5 warlock, just call him a gunner. That would probably be a better way to go about it than the convoluted mechanics you just described.
Like Ogre said, you can create and design rules, but the more complex they are, the less likely anyone other than you wants to work with them. Its the reason i prefer Pathfinder over my friend's "Edge" combat maneuver resolution bunk. I hear it and I just want to groan.
I have a problem with the guns = touch ac concept and thts special materials ok a good gun can shoot through your tin plate mail but what about an adamantite set you lead bullet would be a decorative new badge and little else really.
Still the pathfinder armor rules don't work that way therefore all you can really do is assume armor works against guns.