Bayonet - Designer needs to go back to the drawing board.


Rules Questions


So I finally looked at the bayonet, and unless I am reading this wrong they are PLUGGING the bayonet into the barrel, rendering the weapon system inoperable whilst a bayonet is fitted until you take a move action to remove it.

On what planet does a bayonet get stuck down a barrel!?

rules wrote:


Bayonets are close combat weapons designed to fit into the grooves or muzzles of crossbows and firearms.

Benefit: Bayonets allow you to make melee attacks with these weapons but render them temporarily useless as ranged weapons.

Attach/Remove: Attaching or removing a bayonet is a move action.

Did the writer never see one in real life?


8 people marked this as a favorite.

Early bayonets were called "Plug Bayonets" because you did literally plug them into the barrel. Obviously, these were not as effective as later socket or ring bayonets, but they did exist for a time.

It seems a bit odd that plug bayonets would be the only ones around, and I would personally house rule that bayonets don't prevent ranged attacks. But they would provide a penalty such as -5 to range increment due to the greater weight.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Early era Bayonets are plug types, as in they are meant to be socketed into the barrel of the firearms. Though yea it didn't take people very long to realize that this just effectively turned your firearm into an unwieldy spear.

*Ninja-ed


Indeed it would be strange to plug them in rather than on.

From a game mechanic standpoint why would you bother attaching a bayonet rather than just drawing a normal weapon and not suffering additional penalties etc?

I agree that a range increment penalty should be applied, but this move action stuff is just nuts.

The way it has been designed just doesn't make any sense in an abstracted combat game.

Given the amount of spiked armour, gloves, shields, etc already in play I am not certain they needed to add such a bizzare mechanic 'for balance' so perhaps they should consider unborking the thing.

Sczarni

I purchased a Mithral bayonet for my Musket Master, and it came in handy during one scenario where we had to spend a few rounds fighting underwater.


Could you not have bought a mithril 'insert weapon' instead, and been as (or more) effective?

You wouldn't have lost multiple move actions.


The plug bayonet, as many have mentioned, just converts the musket into a melee weapon for those desperate moments when it comes to what, in an earlier period, was called "the push of pikes". In short your single shot arquebus / early musket becomes an improvised spear. That's how it originated. Desperate soldiers improvising. I suppose a socket bayonet might be in line for the more advanced weapons / periods. For the most part, if it comes to that melee moment, you drop the musket and pull another weapon. Quick draw time...

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A bayonet, for a gunslinger, is actually better. It's a two-handed weapon that deals 1d6+1.5 STR, and is only a move action to attach. That means you can attach it and attack in the same round.


Use a double barrel gun.

Plug a bayonet into one of the holes that you don't use.

SCIENCE!

Use a pistol-cane sword. Add a bayonet.

DOUBLE SCIENCE!

I only kid though, they are terrible. The only good one is that magical one that confers all the bonuses to itself, but even then, you should probably just pistol whip.


Actually does the enhancement bonus from the firearm transfer to the bayonet? Would be rather worth it then. Depending on your bonuses, +3 to hit and damage is nothing to sneeze at.

Though my gut tells me you can't do this, since they are effectively two separate weapons till connected.


Nefreet wrote:
A bayonet, for a gunslinger, is actually better. It's a two-handed weapon that deals 1d6+1.5 STR, and is only a move action to attach. That means you can attach it and attack in the same round.

Draw the weapon is a move action.

Fit the weapon is a move action.

No attack in the same round for you...!

Even with quickdraw you'd only get a standard attack, or a full attack with anything else. When you are done you also need to remove it to return your weapon to a useable state.

Lawstead wrote:


Though my gut tells me you can't do this, since they are effectively two separate weapons till connected.

Correct, its separate weapons, except for the Sharpshooters blade or something, which is a magic item.

Shadow Lodge

You don't need to drop your gun (and provoke when you retrieve it) if you use a bayonet. Also, not all weapons are created equal. As of yet, I have found no reason to ever use a mattock over a scythe, or any reason to use a Khopesh over a longsword (other than theme). So bayonet over anything else, theme would be a legit reason.


Given the circumstances under which bayonets are used, it's likely that most infantrymen wouldn't be carrying longswords anyway.

If taken in the context of the sword-and-sorcery assumption of Pathfinder, they don't stack up mechanically. I could easily see a good Pathfinder game that ups the tech level a bit - and then most soldiers would be armed with bayonets.

It'd require some rules patches though. Perhaps ballistic vests could provide natural "deflection" bonuses to AC. Not perfect, but too many complicated rules patches is undesirable.


Just allow the player to fire the bayonet out afterwards. Problem solved.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shifty wrote:

Indeed it would be strange to plug them in rather than on.

From a game mechanic standpoint why would you bother attaching a bayonet rather than just drawing a normal weapon and not suffering additional penalties etc?

I agree that a range increment penalty should be applied, but this move action stuff is just nuts.

The way it has been designed just doesn't make any sense in an abstracted combat game.

Given the amount of spiked armour, gloves, shields, etc already in play I am not certain they needed to add such a bizzare mechanic 'for balance' so perhaps they should consider unborking the thing.

Some things in the game are there for flavor. It's not hard to imagine that they began the design of firearms in the game with the most archaic examples, and drew their version of the bayonet from the same pool of study.

Not every single thing is about mechanical balance.


Alarox wrote:
Just allow the player to fire the bayonet out afterwards. Problem solved.

That's going to cause far more problems than it solves, not the least of which being some player demanding to quick-install 5 bayonets a round and fire them as projectiles, saying "the rules don't say I can't!".

Also, guns exploding in your face. That too.


Bizbag wrote:
Alarox wrote:
Just allow the player to fire the bayonet out afterwards. Problem solved.

That's going to cause far more problems than it solves, not the least of which being some player demanding to quick-install 5 bayonets a round and fire them as projectiles, saying "the rules don't say I can't!".

Also, guns exploding in your face. That too.

A joke is a joke. But an awesome idea can also be a joke.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons/weapon-descriptions/fire- lance


Fair enough. Though that particular weapon does come with hefty enough penalties (one almost wonders why you wouldn't just throw the javelin yourself).

Shadow Lodge

Reign of winter adventure path, volume #5 introduces a ring bayonet that allows you to fire while it's attached. Unfortunately, it only works on the specific rifle it is designed for (also in the AP). And of course, neither is allowed in PFS.


There's a bayonet in skull & shackles that adds the guns enhancements to the bayonet.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

So should the title of this post be switched to "Designer actually did their homework and the OP didn't"?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

More like "designer chose to go with the subpar interpretation that while technically existed, was replaced/coexisted with improved versions almost immediately. Also, OP didn't do his homework."

Silver Crusade

I'm just waiting for someone to raise the 'if my bayonet equipped musket is +1, is my melee attack magical' thing.

If, as I'd argue, not. Then maybe they found a use for all those magic daggers that adventures seem to start tripping over at mid levels.


Yay! Soon upcoming: the Shield-musket, the hammer-arquebus and the pick-gonne!


Skylancer4 wrote:
So should the title of this post be switched to "Designer actually did their homework and the OP didn't"?

Are your weapons all made of bronze?

Given the firearms roaming about the accessory (bayonet) is highly anachronistic.


So bash the designer and publisher in a public forum for making a choice you don't agree with?

House rule it if you don't like it.


Page 48 of the Mythic Adventures book shows a very nice picture of a Dwarf firing a Crossbow with a Bayonet ATTACHED and UNDER the bolt "barrel"

Proving once and for all, Crossbows do NOT have a hole to shove the bayonet into and... that designers who have NEVER seen a weapon should not try and write rules about it's use!


In skull and shackles my 16 str teifling with power attack at lvl...12 I think it waa the laat fight of book 5. Anyhow we buffes and I just stabbed everything with the bayonette. Although this would be less attractive now that mysterious strangerz can get dex to damage.

But really in the underwater stuff the bayonette wasbuseful. Probably moreso that it gave the guns weaponn properties.


Quote:
Bayonets are close combat weapons designed to fit into the grooves or muzzles of crossbows and firearms. They allow you to make melee attacks with these weapons but render them temporarily useless as ranged weapons. Attaching or removing a bayonet is a move action.

You can use your firearm enchantments on melee (if they are available on a melee weapon) with this little thing. Cool.

Digital Products Assistant

Removed a couple posts. Be civil to each other, please.


LoneKnave wrote:
More like "designer chose to go with the subpar interpretation that while technically existed, was replaced/coexisted with improved versions almost immediately. Also, OP didn't do his homework."

Incidentally, Reign of Winter Part 5 has the Socket Bayonet, which allows the gun to be fired while attached, but at a slight penalty.


HectorVivis wrote:
Quote:
Bayonets are close combat weapons designed to fit into the grooves or muzzles of crossbows and firearms. They allow you to make melee attacks with these weapons but render them temporarily useless as ranged weapons. Attaching or removing a bayonet is a move action.
You can use your firearm enchantments on melee (if they are available on a melee weapon) with this little thing. Cool.

You need a specific magic bayonet to transfer the gun enchantments


Hmmmm... By RAW, I don't see why.
Care to link me to the one bayonet you talk about ?

It would be even better if you had something that rule against the bayonet using the firearm's enchantments.

Not that I distrust you, but I'd like to have all the cards in my hand when I talk about it to my players.


Idk why the developers think the Musket can't be used in melee. It's a big ass club, so use the stat block for club when you want to melee (aside from this Bayonet shenanigans, but they have the same stats anyways)

Also, anyone who says the Musket doesn't work as a melee weapon or thinks using the butt constitutes an "improvised weapon" clearly has never been hit with or wielded a musket before (former ACW reenactor).


The musket besides being a firearm is, when used in melee and fitted with a bayonet is a double weapon. Yes, I mean the butt, buttstroke any orcs lately??

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Bayonet - Designer needs to go back to the drawing board. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rules Questions