Just starting a new campaign and decided to allow firearms. I just realized there is little you can do against them, magically or otherwise. So maybe wizards came up with this?
Bulletproof
Aura strong abjuration; CL 3th; Weight —; Price +1 bonus
DESCRIPTION
This suit of armor or shield adds its AC bonus to its wearer’s AC vs touch against firearm attacks.
CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS
Craft Magic Arms and Armor, bullet shield; Cost +1 bonus
What do you think?
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Am I the only one that thinks that a firearm's misfire chance and high cost of ammunition are a balance to them going up against a targets touch AC (ONLY first range increment for early firearms, first 5 increments for advanced firearms)?
Essentially, this armor ability completely negates the advantage firearms have compared to other weapons...
It doesn't seem too bad. However, it is far more use when advanced firearms are involved. Maybe +1 bonus for early firearms, and it reduces advanced firearms effectiveness down to a max of 3 range increments instead of 5. For the full 5, I'd say it should be a +2 bonus.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Guns are expensive, prone to misfire, and difficult to get multiple attacks with. For all their disadvantages over bows they gain one solitary bonus, they count as touch attacks within the first range increment. If you're prepared to allow firearms DON'T make removing there ONE advantage that easy.
I roll with higher tech settings, so some sort of bulletproofing is essential.
I actual have Masterwork armor count half its AC against firearms. Which is entirely appropriate as the term bulletproof comes from Armorsmiths proving their armor would stop bullets by shooting it with a pistol.
Considering different perspectives:
Game balance/crunch: No. Guns are already pretty weak for all the associated costs.
Narrative/fluff: Maybe. Hardening a suit of armor against the power of the gun is within reason. Alternatively, there is a strong narrative history of technology and elements of science/rationalism shattering the ephemeral nature of eldritch energies and strange magicks. Take your pick.
Realism: How real do you feel? A gun's greatest strength in the days of early firearms was largely their "simple, point-and-click interface" which you could train a two-man peasant team to use in a few weeks. Further, I don't know *that* much about archery and gun history, but I'm given to understand the crossbow was pretty good at punching holes in plate armor too. The big thing about bullets was they made more grievous wounds which were a lot harder to treat, a bolt sank into your flesh, a bullet punched through, bounced off your armor's back plate (through your body) and shattered into fragments. And analyzing how THAT breaks down tears open the big can of worms regarding wounds, hit points, and the fact that in the real world hitting a level 20 or a level 1 in the face with a longsword will kill 'em both just as dead.
GM with munchkin players: Game balance arguments have already pointed out problems with guns, but let's point out a few more. Lead bullets are heavy. Of course players usually have magic bags, but those still have limits. Gunpowder is heavy too, but also fragile and volatile. The tricky quasit (or worse, ghost with access to fire magic) can cause some very troublesome detonations. If you've ever played one of the mechwarrior games, just hear the words "Internal Ammo Explosion" and remember the pain.
Besides, it's not like this will apply to the natural armor bonuses of your great big monsters that don't wear armor.
Players against GM with Gunslingers: Suck it up, nancy.
EDIT: Also learn to duck and cover.
1. It doesn't mean every single person is going to be wearing bulletproof armor as no single person is wearing any other +1 ability armor.
2. I think it makes sense from the world's perspective to respond with something when a new thing arises that bypasses the normal defenses.
Do you think this ability would seriously imbalace firearms by its mere existence? Aren't there other similar abilities, like say, fire resistence, that do pretty much the same against other types of attacks?
DarienCR wrote: 1. It doesn't mean every single person is going to be wearing bulletproof armor as no single person is wearing any other +1 ability armor.
2. I think it makes sense from the world's perspective to respond with something when a new thing arises that bypasses the normal defenses.
Do you think this ability would seriously imbalace firearms by its mere existence? Aren't there other similar abilities, like say, fire resistence, that do pretty much the same against other types of attacks?
Fire resistance is basically DR and doesn't scale well against damage to boot as generally blasting spells do it in one big burst rather than multiple attacks.
This would be akin to getting rid of the "touch" part on most touch spells for a relatively cheap bonus. Honestly, firearms can become a huge threat, a good deal of it because they ignore a huge chunk of most people's AC. I can't imagine anyone who already has a +2 on their armor going for a +3 over this in a world where guns are prevalent.
I mean, a simple +1 full plate is less than 3k gold. For a +10 to AC. Imagine if we bumped that cost to just under 6k and for that price you got a +10 AC vs gun slingers. That is what this does. Light and Medium armor you can still call a bit iffy. In a world where gun slingers are that big a thing, no one with the gold in heavy armor should not get this ability.
boring7 wrote: Players against GM with Gunslingers: Suck it up, nancy. Honestly, not only do I disagree but the way you put it there is quite rude.
NPC gunslingers are a bit of a kick to players. As has been noted, one of the major balancing acts is the cost for their ammunition. But gunslingers that are NPC's are made at that level. You don't have to take into account what they've spent on ammunition used along the way and so effectively they'd have more gold than someone who actually realistically had to level to that point.
In short, they get to skip out on one of the great detractors on the class right up until you create them.
I'd make it a +2 or let it only apply your enchantment bonus to your AC VS firearms
Thomas Long 175 wrote: boring7 wrote: Players against GM with Gunslingers: Suck it up, nancy. Honestly, not only do I disagree but the way you put it there is quite rude.
NPC gunslingers are a bit of a kick to players. As has been noted, one of the major balancing acts is the cost for their ammunition. But gunslingers that are NPC's are made at that level. You don't have to take into account what they've spent on ammunition used along the way and so effectively they'd have more gold than someone who actually realistically had to level to that point.
In short, they get to skip out on one of the great detractors on the class right up until you create them. I'm being rude for comedic effect. If anyone was offended I apologize.
More to the point, if you feel your GM is being "unfair" with the gunslingers that get thrown at you, s/he is probably going to be "unfair" about a homebrew armor enchant.
Additional: -Looted gunpowder/guns work/sell just as well as the magic arrows that an NPC archer uses.
-The GM gets to do what they want with NPC resources/stats/abilities ANYWAY.
DarienCR wrote: Just starting a new campaign and decided to allow firearms. [/b]I just realized there is little you can do against them, magically or otherwise.[/b] protection from arrows works against all ranged attacks, BTW. There ARE options. Using cover is another one, in case I was too subtle earlier.
When coming up with a new thing like this, it's good to compare to existing ones.
Ghost Touch allows you to add your armour AC to touch attacks against incorporeal foes. Allowing AC to touch AC against one specific type of attack. It's a +3 ability.
Therefore adding your armour AC to touch AC against gun attacks is likely going to be higher than a +1. You could argue that Ghost Touch is higher because it makes armour useable by incorporeal foes as well, but given that they're mostly unaffected by physical attacks, this is a hard sell. The ability you're proposing ought to be at least a +2, quite possibly +3.
If you want an already extant alternative, try shields with Arrow Deflection. Itself a +2 ability, it'll allow one shot per round to be foiled.
I agree with Scythia. A +3 modifier sounds about where I'd put it.
I also agree that +3 sounds better, or maybe you might not want make it a blanket transfer to touch AC against firearms, maybe make it scaling.
Here i list the ways to get help against firearms.
yeah... just the enhancement bonus would be better.
For +3, it would probably be fair to have it apply against all ranged touch attacks.
The firearm provision is VERY niche. ANd most people consider Ghost Touch on armor overpriced for what it does (note that it's +1 for weapons!)
==Aelryinth
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules
|
