@@matthewquan9083 He has, but I kind of feel like Skall has done enough research for these videos that he's going to end up playing tabletop games at some point. Of course he may already, he just said that he didn't play D&D. There's tons of other games out there, some much better systems than D&D.
"so what kind of crazy and wacky power do you have" "i have a gun" "oh... its some kind of magical gun or something like that" "well i thing .500 S&W magnum is pretty magical on its own right"
@@Ashtor1337 Oh don't get me wrong. Spells are way more versatile overall. I just think it's funny that in terms of pure offensive power, guns can often match up to "special" powers featured in all sorts of series.
Elephant guns seem like a good example of how much gun people thought was necessary for an elephant, and then you can extrapolate that to fantasy monsters
Though if rocket launchers, shaped charges, and recoilless rifles exist in a fantasy setting, then fighting monsters just becomes a slightly less difficult form of anti-tank warfare and air defense.
Fr elephants have 76 HP .average people have like 3-6 . A young blue dragon has 152 HP meaning they have exactly double the durability of an elephant so elephant guns would definitely put the hurt on them . People really underestimate modern weapons especially the heavy ones . Tldr like 20 guys with elephant guns beat just about any dnd creature under like cr 15-20 not counting ghosts or other shenanigans
@@codbeast914 thats part of the weirdness of the D&D system. Elephants have massive amounts of health letting them shrug off 4 bolts of lightning or a fall from orbit with some HP left over yet historically were also killed with a small pick to the back of the head that in D&D does 3 damage on average
I think Vermintide had the perfect approach towards making guns not OP which was 1. You wanna save those bullets for when the enemies *also* have guns (or magic/anything ranged) because you're getting constantly overwhelmed. 2. Penetrating armor is nice and all but when your opponent is 700 pounds of muscle and his chest is 3 feet+ thick a steel pebble going through him isn't going to much better than an axe.
The ammo limitation feels pretty well balanced in the normal levels at least. Boss fights on the other hand, there are no ammo drops; making ammo-based ranged weapons completely useless compared to overheat-based ranged weapons.
.... my God is this comment stupid. This literally depends on the round being fired. At 1000m a .50cal SLAP round will penetrate 1.5in of Hardend steel armor designed to stop bullets. These same round at 100m will go through a 3ft thick wall and a person. How do I know this? I've seen it. A .357 magnum was designed to kill any thing in N. America with a single shot. That includes Grizzly Bears. Hell a .357 Magnum would go through the gorse I ride and she's 2500lbs draft horse whose breed is the largest horse breed in the world and holds the record for largest horse to ever live.
@@novacorponline The handgun is viable on highest difficulty because 16 well placed shots should be enough for any boss. Of course you won't kill most bosses with the musket alone, but it never felt underpowered. It's a matter of individual ability to place crits. Don't know about the other weapons though.
Another reason why guns might not simply outclass other ranged weapon options in a DnD setting is that they’re extremely loud. You can take someone out with a bow or crossbow relatively quietly. If you try to stealth with a boom stick you’re going to alert pretty much everyone to the fact that you’ve just fired a gun. This not only balances guns a bit but also adds a bit of depth to them.
Can't recover ammunition either. Arrows can be reused most of the time in fantasy and sometimes irl, but gun ammunitions ? They literally just exploded.
@@xaviermantha63 technially with old school musket ball it would be simple in fantasy to make more just take some metal and have the wizard shape it into tiny balls. the gunpowder is the hard part run out of that in the field and you have no shot of just scrounging some up quick
Yet, due to the semantics of WotC's wording, firearms can still do Sneak Attack damage because Sneak Attack in game doesn't necessarily require you to lie prone on the ground, covered in mud and making as little sound as possible. It only requires you to make the attack with a ranged or finesse weapon, get advantage on the attack (with unseen attacker being the most sought after as a way to live up to the name) or to not have disadvantage and get an ally within 5ft of your target. The big benefit is the greater damage die. Using the DMG, muskets deal d12 piercing on a hit, the same damage die as a greataxe. But going back to the original point, I once deafened my entire party in game firing my CR musket at a guard. That was funny. We could still fight but without ears to hear anything, my Mountain Dwarf Gunslinger was basically shouting gibberish in an attempt to pull off one liners Urist Boatmurdered style with every single shot.
This is also why HP isn't exactly used to say "this is how much blood is in your body" but rather your endurance and stamina. Attacks that hit aren't telling blows but small hits that get past your guard and sap your strength and stamina to stay in the fight the one that brings you to 0 being the actual good strike that brings you down.
@@mrosskne Poison is same as any other damage type and poison condition isnt super debilitating in 5e but getting cut by poisoned blade or stinger is all it takes. Swallow attacks and Lava are almost always followed by immense damage so no issues there XD
@@mrosskne Same thing?...I dont understand your question. If you get poisoned it is literally just you slowly getting worse and worse untill you get it treated..ya know...like you would imagine poison would do. Swallowed is the same except it is usually acid damage slowly burining you untill you can't fight back anymore. Fire damage is the same..at some point you get too burned to move and you die.... Is it 100% realistic? No, obviously not. It is a game with god damn flying fire breathing lizards, literal magic and you are someone special with the powers to help others....it isn't supposted to be realistic it is supposted to be fun and make sense in the setting and I would genuinly state the HP in dnd as written works fairly well.
I've always preferred the rogue-like experience to HP. At high levels, HP can make a 1-shot kill almost (or perhaps literally if it is "balanced") impossible. I can see why it is necessary for most campaigns. Combat is rarely avoidable for the entire campaign, most players don't want to reroll characters they put time, effort, and quite often emotional investment into, and rerolling characters often delays the game anyway. To me, I prefer the low levels of D&D specifically because the first hit your character takes could be their last. There is more pressure to assess whether combat really is the best solution, and if it is how can you get the first blow. Thus, at higher levels I tend to prefer optional rules that make nat 20s especially dangerous. Finally, I don't like how taking blows doesn't really debilitate the character. A "non-lethal" hit in real life could still mean a hand cut off, or hanging uselessly due to nerve damage. Plenty of hits will be lethal soon if not immediately addressed (I do like the opportunity to stabilize a character with
In a fantasy setting where you have fast shooting bows, and powerful single action firearms, crossbows can still be balanced to be viable. Slow rate of fire, but able to launch specialized munitions such as wooden stakes, nets, a grappling hook, and even alchemical vials (corrosive, explosive, gas, etc)
True, but this could be done to a certain degree with bullets, too. You couldn't fire a stake out of a gun, but you can fire silver bullets, but then, of course, you can also have silver tipped arrows, so that feels like kind of a toss up to me. Same goes for something like an Arcane Archer. Magic is magic, there's no rules saying you can't enchant bullets as well. However, because it's a less complex and specific mechanism for bows, you can kinda just launch whatever with it, it's really more of a fancy slingshot, whereas in a pinch you could use shrapnel or maybe some pebbles, but if you don't have bullets, and if they aren't the right type of bullet, the gun's useless. Ultimately, though, none of this really matters. Role-playing games are aboot role-playing (it's in the damn name) and the specifics of combat mechanics are of tertiary importance. What matters is the role the weapons have in the setting of the game, and the ways in which players choose to use them. You can argue aboot balance all day, but when you're actually playing an rpg with firearms in it, you're thinking of character first, with combat simply being one possible means of resolving a conflict. Thinking tactically is for wargaming, role-players need to think dramatically. And when push comes to shove, you kill Dracula with a whip, werewolves with a cane, and mummies by taking away their tea.
@@princessmaly Be it video games or TTRPG, games will always have limitations for the sake of balance, as its what makes the difference between playing a game and just telling a cool story; however, in this case, some of the limitations are built into the weapon designs themselves. First off, the bow wouldn't work as a "fancy slingshot" able to use any random object as ammo, because the bow itself would get in the way of the projectile; therefore, it would be limited to only using ammo with similar dimensions and properties to an arrow (allowing the projectile to curve around the bow as the string propels it). A crossbow, on the other hand, could in fact work as a sort of slingshot, in the sense that you would be able to launch anything that can be propelled by its string. Obviously, the range and accuracy will vary depending on the projectile, but it is more plausible than attaching something heavy at the tip of an arrow, or stuffing it in a gun. As for firearms, due to their method of propelling projectiles by means of a gunpowder blast, as well as the specific size of the chamber, the use of improvised/specialized munitions is limited. Hand loading random objects into the firearm could result in more trouble for the user than the target; for example: a vial of hazardous chemicals would shatter before exiting the barrel, due to the gunpowder detonation. Special ammo can be used, but it would need to be designed and crafted by a gunsmith to work properly with the firearm. Now that we're on the subject of special munitions; yes, they all have access to silver and enchanted munitions, but the crossbow's design is the most fitting for the use of non-conventional ammo (such as the aforementioned vial); however, it would still be balanced by its low fire rate. Adding magic into the mix, it would need limitations as well, because just as the arcane archer is able to imbue arrows with magic, an arbalist with access to the same magic could imbue any random object they load on their crossbow; so to avoid having a fancy slingshot able to shoot an infinite number of enchanted pebbles, let's say only specific materials (such as what's used on the arrowheads) can be imbued. Let's also make it so that the caster needs see what they are enchanting and its only active for a short time; this would make the bow the most optimal for the use of enchanted ammo, since the arrows can be imbued and shot in rapid succession. Now let's rule that lead is a material that can't be imbued, so not only does the gunner need to enchant and load each bullet individually before firing it, but they also need special bullets made of some magic conducting material, making firearms less ideal for magic ammo. But what if the reason lead can't be imbued is because it has anti-magic properties? What seemed like a drawback can be an advantage now, as magical beings would be extremely weak to lead bullets. The magic rules can be applied any number of ways, but be sure to have limitations that make things interesting and balanced. Regardless of the supernatural elements of this fantasy setting, when it comes to the weapon designs, each has their own advantage and disadvantage: Bow +stealthy, special techniques (e.g: rapid fire, multi-shot, rain of arrows) -requires full draw to maximize damage and range Crossbow: +versatile projectile launcher (AOE, crowd control, etc.) -must be spanned before every shot Firearm + consistent high damage (armor piecing, hollow point) -recoil, single action, and requires reloading after a number shots Its a bit tricky to translate this into turn based TTRPG combat system, but if we are going by the storytelling style you described, at least the feats you attempt would be more plausible if they fit the properties of the weapon you are using; lest you hit the back of your thumb with an enchanted pebble, when you chose to use a bow instead of a crossbow 😄
I would recommend The Ten Realms series by Michael Chatfield it is about two military types who get pulled into a martial arts fantasy world. A part of that book series that always amuses me is how hard the two main characters have to work to make firearms viable in a martial arts fantasy world where people can shrug off getting shot with a powerful sniper rifle. It does a good job showing how much work goes into the production side of making fire arms and ammunition.
It reminds me a bit of X-Chronicles (a total conversion of UFO Defence where fantasy creatures get isekaied) where the orcs can tank several hits from 50. cals., and magic shields can stuff them entirely.
@@rayhanmustakim7073 The magic in the world operates on a what ever doesn't kill you makes you stronger kind of system. So by surviving a lot of punishment a person can have skin stronger than steel. It is common for some characters to intentionally injure themselves to improve their bodies durability even though the experience is incredibly painful.
The idea of a gun and sorcery themed dungeon amuses me, where guns and magic rule but the sword and other melee weapons are still used in hand to hand combat situations.
Shadowrun. Include cybernetic enhancements, weaponized eldritch horror and corporate hostile takeovers. Real hostile by the CEO personally who happens to be an Elder Dragon.
Pillars of Eternity has guns where their main use is piercing the arcane veil that wizards use, but also, because of how reloading works in the game, Wizards with guns actually are really strong - Ciphers, magic users that gain power from doing damage, even more so. You can shoot once with your arquebus, and instead of reloading you just cast a bunch of spells until the fight ends. There's no downside to guns if you never reload.
Final Fantasy 14 actually did this well with the conflict between the Garlean Empire and Eorzea. The Garlean had to adapt as their people are incapable of utilizing aether (magic), so they created Magitek weaponry and used gunblades. Throughout the history of FF14 (until Shadowbringers at least), Garlemald was a powerhouse thanks to its technological advancements. In the end though, it was ultimately a civil war that led to the collapse of the Garlean Empire, the aftermath of which is seen in Endwalker where Garlemald's city capital is nothing but smoldering ruins, the only surviving bit of technology that hasn't become hostile being a train station where the remaining civilians and Garlean soldiers use as a base of operations and a refuge to escape the danger
As a gm who has tried to work guns into a dnd setting before, the hardest balance was making them powerful enough to make them feel impactful enough to use, without making them instant kill machines. It was rough at first, but after about a year and a half we had a system that was working, and it was cool to see a more range and movement based campaign of 3.5e
Legit just make em -loud -deal a single die more than the crossbow/bow equivalent (hand crossbow=pistol,heavy crossbow=sniper/heavy rifle, long bow=musket/standard rifle, heavy crossbow with less range range=shotgun/blunderbuss) -incapable of arcing your shot -if you keep track of ammo it’s costly and or rare -if you keep track of weight they are heavier -special ammo is more rare and or expensive compared to the bow/crossbow equivalents I think the whole balancing issue is just it’s own problem, in fact if a player just wants a gun reflavor the bow/crossbow equivalent with the same dmg and make it un silent, if they want it to feel special make it enchanted or give it a story Long and short of it, it’s a gun no need to overcomplicate it
I know in Pathfinder 2e, they're balanced weirdly but are still kind of neat. Essentially they're slightly stronger than bows and crossbows, but more expensive to maintain and require actions to reload BUT there are feats for Gunslingers to turn those reload actions into other actions (like attacking, defending or moving). A lot of the feats associtated with them beyond that are mostly for map control, like punishing enemies for moving at a distance. Makes them unique from archer fighters or rangers while not making them OP.
@@garrettlich7140 What about the fact that a musket can output over 10x the energy that a crossbow can and is known for punching through contemporary armor? Your proposal is lazy and pointless, why would I trade my element of surprise for maybe 2 points of maximum damage? What you have done is make firearms objectively terrible to use compared to a crossbow, both for adventurers and soldiers.
@@jonathanwells223 laughs in fireball, But in all seriousness the games machanics are just that machanics, if you or another player want the rp of having a firearm and the dm wants things to be as balanced mechanically as possible and or low effort then simply reflavor, if you want guns to be more powerful you can do that by upping dmg and or range at the cost of accessibility to ammo/guns or force reloading as an action Thier are many ways both stated and not stated to make firearms fun/balanced in pathfinder and dnd, it boils down to what you and the dm plus party want Edit: I forgot to address you first point, yes a musket ball has more force but dose that really mean anything when going up against an ancient dragon when the monk is using magic mantis style kungfu? My point is that you should have some lvl of both balance and suspension of disbelief, your musket ball can hit a troll thru the skull and not kill it while next turn the rouges dart hits the head and finishes the job because of dice rolls and it’s hp To sum up my whole thing, it’s a game do what ya want with guns in it
I remember a phrase from Shadow and Bone, it boiled down to "When we had sabers, a mage valued 100 of us, now with our rifles, i think we're pretty equal" what's a bullet if not a very small but much faster fireball?
the thing is, if they have bullets (exploited chemistry and physics) the probs have equally advanced and exploited magic. you could imagine a mage being equipped things like advance wands with triggers and rifled barrels, a gun but with all the adaptability of magic and the need to not carry ammo.
@@mryellow6918 Most settings, a magic doesn't work enough like a gun to simply reapply all those firearm technologies to them with no changes. Magic generally requires an "effort of will" or infusion of energy, so mages only cast them when they want to rather than inadvertently firing them off all the time. If spells miss at all, it's not as often as you'd think given the subpar ergonomics of a wand or staff. Even if you could use the extra accuracy rifling provides, it's only effective on projectiles with mass, and simple grooves will only effectively stabilize solid projectiles. Rather than some superior battle wand, you effectively have a regular gun you load with magic instead of conventional ammo and a regular wand fastened together. And you probably don't _want_ your wand shackled to a more cumbersome firearm.
Also, something that oddly turned out to be rather overpowered in Dungeons and Dragons can be javelins. They have a rather long range, and always get strength bonuses to damage. In 3.5 Edition, I had a half-orc barbarian using javelins. With his high movement rate and ridiculous strength, he could run a very good distance and still throw a javelin very accurately, with a huge damage bonus. People were shocked at how much he outperformed dedicated archers with longbows.
Javelins are generally balanced through their low weapon damage die, ammunition, weapon drawing and mechanical challenges. I think they are in a great spot. While most tables forego arrow tracking, i usually see javelins being limited to 4-6 uses before you have to retrieve them again. A level 5 character in D&D 5e has two attacks per round, meaning that if they throw javelins they are out of ammo after 2-3 rounds. Often that's enough, but it is a valid and relevant limitation. Next you can only draw one weapon per turn in 5e, meaning you get maybe two attacks in turn 1 and one attack in turn 2. One D&D playtest changes that, but throwing weapon will still leave you without a weapon in your hand at the end of your turn, lowering the damage your opportunity attacks deal significantly. Barbarians are less impacted here because of their high damage bonuses to unarmed attacks. And lastly you have to deal with limited range and cover. An archer will have the Archery Fighting Style and probably even Sharpshooter, negating all of these entirely. The Barbarian example doesn't get Archery. Of course this is the reason why most Barbarians will take levels in Fighter after lvl 5 or 6 - they can get Thrown Weapon Fighting which increases their damage and also allows them to draw two javelins. Imo it's always the best pick for a Barbarian unless you can use Dueling. It's certainly better than Great Weapon Fighting. --- Overall this means that while yes, javelins are strong, they aren't overpowered and still have significant weaknesses that require investment. I'm actually playing a Hoplite style Barbarian starting Tuesday, and i will make great use of Javelins. Very excited for that, it's a cool and fun playstyle!
TBH in a single combat kinda situation with someone experienced with a javelin, that's sort of what I'd expect. You don't need to stop, draw the thing, aim, fire, you could probably chuck it on the move if you wanted to and still be semi-accurate. Arrows are great when you've got a whole pile of them loosing at once so you can just point in the general direction of a group and probably hit something. Otherwise, there's a reason there's tournament to show off how accurate you can be with a bow, because it's really damn hard.
I mean, yeah. You'd need to be a large-sized creature to be able to compete within the same short range. Clearly your archers refused to engage at their full range increment, or even the second.
I fondly remember a 5E campaign where my pirate character had a Repeating Shot pistol. For the uninformed, Repeating Shot is an artificer infusion that ignores loading and that pulling the trigger will magically create a bullet in the chamber. DM balanced this by requiring me to always have black powder available for the gun to draw from. So another way to balance guns and bows/crossbows is having to add powder on top of having to carry ammunition.
@@sundaw I skipped 4 entirely because it was basically D&D the action card game. TBH not super knowledgeable about it. It was just way out there weird compared to every other version of D&D. As for 5th I could go on for hours but for sake of brevity I'll make a short list. 1) Advantage/disadvantage system replacing stacking bonuses generally negates good RP and character diversity in place of a "get advantage, apply disadvantage, win" scenario. 2) Constrained number range limits build diversity to an extent that frankly you could remove stats/skills entirely and not much would change. Generally you are looking at a range of 6-8 numbers on a d20 of difference between everyone in the party and every monster. 3) Limited number range ruining item diversity by constraining everything to such a narrow range there is little to no room for interesting items. 4) Removal of mechanically complex concepts like concealment percentages, partial/full cover, dropping prone to avoid projectiles, the grappling system, the 5 foot steps, a deep and varied feat system that didn't overlap with ability progression, skill ranks, removal of ability to maintain multiple overlapping spells, ect. 5) Changing the rest system in a way that pigeon holes DM's into spamming the party with a ton of small encounters due to short rest mechanics. This also means injuries are rarely scary, and death is hard to come by. Ultimately the biggest issues can all be summed up as "simplified to the point where it feels like 3.5 for the masses." 5th edition is basically "D&D for Dummies." You can replace the entire system with the following and nothing much changes during a session. Roll a D6. Fail on 1-3 Succeed on 4-6. With Disadvantage Fail on 4 as well. With Advantage Succeed on 3 as well. With such a small range of numbers that's how 5th edition ultimately plays. None of your character choices really matter. It's the illusion of choice.
@@JohnSmith-ty2he I played a setting for the 3.5 called Iron Kingdoms- now it is a stand-alone D20 game- that has melee and firearm, it was a Steampunk setting and it was really fun because the guns were powerful but slow to recharge, and every cartridge was expensive as it was created by alchemy. Even today I have a sweet spot for that game. I do not know why someone should be afraid of firepower, you just need a DM smart enough to balance things, and if your DM is not able to do so you can have problems even with the more basic precooked Faeroun's adventures.
I love stonebows. One of my favorite weapons from an aesthetic standpoint. Unfortunately, the delivered kinetic energy never really made them viable as a battlefield weapon, but they were very popular for small game hunting. It was a great way to take out rabbits, squirrels, birds, etc. without destroying the body with an arrow.
I would like to point out that in Gary Gygax's Chainmail (the precursor to D&D) arquebusiers (effectively a medieval soldier with a musket) were an actual unit type. The game also features rules for cannons!
plus they would latter be adapted in as well its just now its specialized units or artificers making them rather then just mass produced fire armes being cheaply aviable.
@@housewilma4904 Character idea: the issue with early firearm barrels was you had to keep a cool rod in place and smith molten metal around it. Perhaps there is a gnome or dwarf that "has a great idea for a new weapon" but he needs to track down an enchanted cold iron rod to make it.
@@kylejohnson423 plus cold iron musket balls would be the perfect anti mage weapon. as both weapon and ammo would be magic resistant going straight threw magic shields. plus if you run out of ammo you could still bash the spellcaster over the head with the buttstock doing the same damaga as a cold iron club.
You know what's funny? I looked up the origin of the phrase "top notch" and there's not much known about it. There are a few ideas, but few sound solid and no one really agrees on anything. The most plausible one was a suggestion that it came from an old game of some kind in which the top notch was the highest score. Funny how that happens in language.
For one of my campaigns I created an artificer that used a gun capable of shooting different effects in addition to its normal gun so it had a shotgun like blast and a lighting bolt piercing round. The gun itself was based off one I saw on Forgotten Weapons as a breech loading wheelock that used a metal canister that fit into a part of the breech to say how I reloaded it so fast despite it being a blackpowder weapon. As for working it into the world I main said he was already an arcane engineer so the gun was one of his personal pet projects
Yo that's a solid idea. An Artificer who's a pirate and the tinkery implement they make to cast a spell is a row of flintlock pistols strapped across their chest like a pirate's gunbelt. Artificers are supposedly supposed to make something that is used to replicate the spell effects. Shame I despise artificers because I cannot tolerate staggered spell level progression. Their casting needs to be full or like the warlock.
@@asitallfallsdown5914 Nah I don't mind spell progression like that to me its meant to be a hybrid spell class like Eldritch Knight. And to be fair the character was originally based off the UA playtest Artificer class but I have since updated him to the new Artillerist one. My backstory for his character was that he was the son of a siege engineer and travelled with his father in a mercenary army (look up condottieros from Italy circa 1300s) where he learned engineering from his father and magic from the army's spell casters and his invention of gunpowder
Pretty sure the gun you're talking about was the leMat revolver which had the cylinder revolve around a chamber for a 410 shotgun shell. Very cool design
A really big potential downside to guns is how incredibly loud they are. Might not matter in some situations, but in others you just alerted every enemy within a few kilometers of you... If you shoot a crossbow at a dragon and miss, the dragon might not notice. If you shoot a rifle at a dragon and miss, the dragon will certainly hear the shot and probably see the smoke (depending on the kind of gun I guess...) Though the sound of the gun could also scare away weaker enemies. A very situational mechanic with lots of possibilities. If you stab a guy in a city the town's people might not find the body for a week... If you start shooting a gun in a city you instantly have the soldiers or town's guard after you.
Not to mention using a gun in a Close quarters area. The sound alone would be enough to deafen smaller enemies, stunning them and removing hearing, while larger enemies/bosses would be stunned for a turn. Meanwhile, the same thing would happen to your allies if they don’t have hearing protection on. (Bringing a whole new set of trade offs)
Played in a D&D campaign that allowed gunslingers. One of my best friends played as a rootin' tootin' cowboy shootin' Elven bounty hunter. He was by far the scariest member of the party when it came to damage, and he earned the unofficial moniker of Mage-Slayer with how quickly he could put down spellcasters. Guns in fantasy RPGs can be quite scary.
I mean, yes its his job. Depending how its implemented an optimized handcrossbow, crossbow expert, sharp shooter fighter will be able to dish out the same amount of dmg, so from what I have seen its not overpowered.
I'd throw a mage at him that specifically targets him: have him get targeted with a spell where he either saves (dodges) or all his powder cooks off, ruining his ammo and cleaving his health in half. Let the enemy learn counterplay too!
@@JohnQDarksoul then maybe 5e is just garbage ... taking defensive spells from mages is like taking extra attacks from warriors or stealth from rogues ... 3 and 3.5 - at lower levels you can either use illusion spells or plethora of barriers , at higher levels you can literally become immune to non magical or magical weapons or become unaffectable by any physical means ...
In some settings to balance firearms against other ranged weapons is their loudness, if one of your heroes fires a gun not only will it attract attention from regular enemies, it could also hurt their teammates ears if they’re too close. Also regular people might become curious who is able to afford a gun if they hear shooting, so it could attract possible thieves
Was checking to see if anyone had already made this comment. That's what almost always stops me from playing a gunslinger in most games, fantasy or not.
5:00 It should be noted that the original idea of Hit Points in D&D wasn't strictly health, but your ability to defend yourself from lethal attacks. As HP depleted what was really depleted was your ability to fend off and reduce mighty axe hits like that to grazing wounds. Losing 18 hp might mean you blocked with your sword, but your arm's gone numb. So then when you go down to 0 hp, it's not that you ran out of blood or health, but that now because your arm went numb your defenses were overwhelmed and you finally let a real blow through
You can balance out the power in a magical world. Guns have more range and speed but magic is more destructive. You can replenish mana but if you're out of bullets, you're done. Humans are enhanced and basically superhuman, they have enchanted armor and weapons, etc. Edit: There's also a point how bows and crossbows can be more potent with magic and supernatural humans. It won't be as obsolete as it did irl.
If you're out of bullets and have a caster especially arcane or even better an artificer you'd be ok, they can help make or convert materials into what will work.
i think guns in a fantasy world would be a great weapon for mages themselves (especially if normal spells need incantations). Just replace the gunpowder with a rolled up fire scroll (or something similar) and the bullet with a magic stone shard (that can possibly be enchanted as well) and the mage has an easy to make quasi infinite amount of light weight ammunition that can potentially be used to deliver remote spells in an instant.
Problem is, as i stated avove: A lvl 1 wizzard can cast 2 spells a day. A lvl 1 gunslinger can shoot more hundreds of bullets aday... So yes, if you allow infinite spellslots, THEN guns make perfect sence...
Also, don't forget the sound: the gunner would require hearing protection (which would incur penalty to perception checks) or suffer deafness condition for a round or two. Also, the sound would always alert pretty much anything in a kilometer radius. Also, imagine firing these things in dark caves, where your other party members are all using dark-vision. DM would be like "Okay, you're all blinded AND deafened for three rounds."
Did an early 1900’s themed game a few months ago. The player with the shotgun forgot what happens when you fire a 12-gauge indoors and the whole party was deafened for a few rounds.
I mean if you start doing that, then you'd have to start doing the same with magic as well. Fireball would become even more of a hindrance to the party since an explosion of that size is also, very loud and very blinding.
@@insertname3977 a fireball isn't exploding on your party if a party member is casting it. So no the sound and light would be away from the group. Adding sound and blinding to a fireball would only make it stronger when hitting enemies.
@@TriariusMetzer Except it's most certainly being used on party members by their own teammates as people don't give a shit who it hits for the most part so long as it hits the enemy, and unless you're miles away from the fireball, you'd still be close enough for the explosion to deafen and blind you.
@@TriariusMetzer The actual description of the spell "A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame." If it's loud enough to hear from over 100 feet away, it most be extremely loud. Being low and bassy probably makes the vibration worse.
aparently in ww1 tehre was a lot more than sabers, people were making improvised melee weapons to fight in the trenches like morning stars and flails and lets not forget the legendary tench shovels
WW1 had a lot of melee weapons for those trenches, as purpose built and manufactured as the triangle bladed dagger with the knuckle-duster guard, all the way to big stick with pointy metal on the end of it. WW1 is honestly the most horrific of the world wars and pretty much set up WW2 but gets covered very little (at least here in America) due to the large and dark shadow of its younger sibling
While that is true, a big part of that was because the standard issue military rifles were not built with the extremely tight quarters of trench warfare in mind, and, other than officers or special duty troops generally, didn't have pistols. The rifles of the time had been designed with the idea of long-range engagements, with rifles often having a zero of 200-300 meters and reaching out to 2000 meters or more. To do so meant the rifle had to have power and length, both of which are a hindrance in the tight confines of trench warfare. If the majority of troops had been issued for example pistol caliber lever action carbines, the prevalence of those improvised melee weapons would have been greatly reduced, possibly to the point of practical nonexistence.
@@NicoPPSh True, but the density of casualties per the land that held said losses is no comparison; not to mention flamethrowers, chemical warfare, long-range artillery bombardment, etc. all made it much worse than the mere losses accrued Either way though, they all sucked
I played in low magic western setting, and our combat always ended in melee: 2 shots from shotgun, 6 shots from revolver and then rush in with sabre. Turn is 6 seconds. Reloading takes 1 turn for Shotgun and 3 for revolver, switching weapons is free (if you drop your current). In high stakes fight, you just cannot waste turns loading.
@@bvoyelr remember that your loaded revolver weight as much as a longsword, cost a lot more money each, and that gun shots cost more than arrow. Might be worth too have two revolver for hard encounters, but most of the time just go with a sword, they are already weakened once you unloaded even one gun.
I like how while you can exhaust your gun of ammo you can't phisically exhaust yourself and just keep swinging and firing off 2 arrows a second is perfectly easy and doable forever, i hate fantasy settings, like either be connected to reality, or be the most cool far off shit ever
Personally, I think the fact that bows and crossbows are silent and can shoot over obstacles is enough in terms of balancing for adventurers. Not to mention that if there is magic in the world, you can always have a bunch of trick arrows or bolts that are more versatile than magic bullets, if you allow those at all.
And who's to say that you can't do the same with bullets? And bullets are much MUCH faster than arrows and bolts. Good luck dodging bullets flying at mach Jesus.
@@ultimaterecoil1136 don’t even need magic, real life explosive ammos a thing But magic is nuts if left unchecked, catapult can turn a pebble into a bullet, make said pebble a molten coal or a poison needle, have a bag of pebbles and your firing squirrel shot for dirt cheap Dm lenience and creative use of gear/abilities is insane and one of the best ways to have fun
@@garrettlich7140 yeah but magic would be more flexible. You don’t have to switch out to your explosive rounds switching to explosive ammo and potentially have the hassle of organizing different ammo types. You decide this situation calls for a bit more boom so you make your next shot have more boom. Plus more a focus on enchanting weapons with extra oomph would mean you wouldn’t be entirely defenseless in situations where magic is disabled. You can still shoot a gun in an antimagic field. You just can’t suddenly shoot an turn a standard round into a explosive or incendiary one on a whim.
In the last Savage Worlda game I ran, I let the players use "wands and staves" with crystals that needed to be swapped out after being used. These were, of course, guns. By the end of the campaign, one of them had created a "Squad Automatic Wand."
You can also limit by price and availability. I'm not going to let a charter start with a +4 Flaming Great Axe, but I don't mind if they get one later. Have the character start with a crossbow and eventually get a rifle. It'll still have all the drawbacks that you discussed in the video, but it also have some major advantages, and that's okay because it's a reward for making it later in the game, same as an enchanted sword or a big spell for the wizard. They are necessarily better than lower class gear and I don't think that's necessarily a problem.
My DM does that on our homebrew D&D 3.5e campaign. Guns came at around the mid levels as an upgrade to the crossbows, when everybody was geared up enough to take that degree of damage. Dealing I think 3d12 damage at first, with higher level versions now reaching up to 5d12 damage plus any bonus from enchanted ammos. No bonus from ability score, weapon jams until next turn on a nat 1. Deals really solid damage. Meanwhile my guy with a sword is hitting for 1d10+34, plus enchantments. It's lower, but way more consistent. And the enemies can just tank that, so both are equally absurd from a realism standpoint. And totally awesome from a "rule of cool" standpoint.
@@pokemon1895 Most of this group is together for three years now, with only one of the members being near a year with us. We put rule of cool and roleplay above everything else (kinda tough during seduction checks, though).
Cleaning should definitely be part of things. Black powder is very foul, someone could be the most skilled shot in the continent but give their gun a chance to misfire or even explode if they clearly aren't making a point to maintain it.
I like how they did blackpowder weapons in Warhammer. Or Mordheim, which I played. They are powerful. But take a long time to reload, so it takes an entire turn to reload. And they can misfire, or explode if you are very unlucky.
Introducing renaissance weapons is relatively easy. Handguns and modern light artillery are important parts of armies and it's still a weird not-fully-modern world. Same with other stuff, cash and nation-states, ships and other bits. Firearms in WFRP aren't all that powerful compared to a crossbow. Some of my friends used a house rule where they rolled damage with advantage. Roll two dice and take the highest. Sometimes they rule that firearms mitigate one point of armour (a bloke in mail and plate has two armour) But in the basic rules, both bows/crossbows and pistols/handguns deal 1d6+3 or +4 damage. Firearms are more expensive tools and require ball and powder. GW being GW, they went about making special rules on top of the special rules for misfire and range bands which bows lacked.
I love how Battlefield 1 "balanced" crossbows by turning it into a grenade launcher. It was actually used in WW1 as the Sauterelle, but got quickly replaced by trench mortars.
Me and my DM came up with an idea for flintlock pistols: Slightly less accurate than a bow/crossbow, does a ton of damage if it hits, but take a full turn to reload, during which you can't do any other actions during that turn.
still feels over nerfed to me. In a game where you can be eldritch blasted into dust there is no reason to limit firearms XD You dont make the sorcerer reload their spells? They can cast them as long as they have spell slots. Why should the firearm have to lose a turn? Obviously scale the different guns like you would any other weapon. You have a broadsword with magic blah blah blah and The gunslinger has a rifle with a 6 round magazine. Guns literally cannot overpower a system WITH MAGIC IN IT XD. I mean maybe if everything was concentration or chant spells but when you can just sith lightning or eldritch blast shit into dust with the wave of your hands XD firearms arent really on that level XD Unless im raining down artillery from half a town away XD
@@WorldWearyAngel it depends on what their dm they have, and what game they are playing First off if they are going off of using 1 major move and 1 minor move, the major is them usually attacking with their weapon or using an ability and attacking, healing or casting a spell etc etc There is also the roll for accuracy (for the attacker) and roll too dodge, (for the defender) roll for accuracy determines how accurate your shot is, if you roll high you have a good chance too hit someone but if its the opposite, you gonna miss entirely (this is the same for every type of attack) For the minor move, you could make the rule to reload your gun, just like how an archer would reload their weapon or a crossbow men and at certain times mages aswell (yes mages need too reload, they use mana too cast magic which they can run out of the thing is they are done for if they run out of mana during combat qs thw only way to reload mana then would be via potion). The point im making is you sacrifice a minor move for not being the target, being the target of regular swordsmen that is, because even if you have a loaded gun, like in this video, would it do damage to some swordsman in full plate armour and if it does, how many rounds? Would it be enough too save you from being stabbed by regular swordsmen? Thats why archers who didnt wear much armour were typically at the back of the army firing volleys of arrows or a bunch of mages using spells, granted that magic seems too be very very powerful imagine the concentration and dedication too casting those spells, or the mana costs to do that, much like the blunderbuss flintlock op is saying, their most powerful move could be a one time use And lastly abilites, abilites would be a vald argument to pick apart in favour of buffing guns as there is only so many abilites you could doo for a gun, but at the same token, the same could be said for crossbows and bows. Now not encluding enchantments as thats too easy and litterally everything could work for that, guns, in theory would have more freedom too make more unique abilites but under the condition of how modern these firearms are, per say you could use a blunderbuss and that would be like close too mid range weapon, you could have irs normal regular attack, you could assassins creed it and just use 3 more guns and drop them once fired or put an exposive inside of it like it was a mini grenade launcher But what about six shot revolvers, well you could fire normally, or pan handle the end of it too fire all 6 shota in a quick burst, scatter fire (mainly just a double attack, close too what a power attack would be) or equip your bullets with what ever you perfer, incenadary, explosive, poison, rage etc etc But then again it comes down too a couple of things, how your dms plays and what TTRPG your playing
@@WorldWearyAngel Really guns can't overpower a system with magic in it? Really? Do you want to continue make idiotic vague statements? A M60 Machine gun can have a 200 rnd belt. Does far more damage than an arrow let's just say a d12 being very generous. And can fire 650 rnds in a minute. Given a players turn is 6 seconds this is essentially 65 rounds in 6 seconds. That would be 65 d12. Tell me a spell that does that. On top of taking a full action to reload a flint lock pistol that is about realistic and balanced. It should technically be more.
A flintlock is going to be 3 shots a minute. That's the length of an entire combat. And probably an entire turn to reload. You also have to concentrate while reloading, probably for an entire turn, which could be interrupted. You can also New York reload, which would roll just like drawing a weapon in combat. Bullets would penetrate your shield or your armor and do massive damage to any humanoid.
I am allowing flintlocks and black powder bombs in my campaign. There's a section in the Dungeon Master's guide about them. Muskets do 1d12 + Dex mod, have a range of 80/120 feet. PS There is also the Gunner feat which gives proficiency in firearms, no close range penalty for ranged weapons, can fire more than once per, and +1 to dexterity
@@jonathanwells223 No, the armor class system in 5e doesn't work like that. They do deal higher damage compared to a crossbow but have shorter range; it's Pike and shot era range. Both a pistol and a heavy crossbow deal 1d10 damage while a musket does 1d12 damage. Upside, a combat round is 6 seconds and it only takes a bonus action to load them. My headcanon is Gnomes developed breech loaded paper cartridge flintlocks sooner.
Guns do exist in the Forgotten Realms. The Waterdeep Dragonheist adventure module has Drow Gunslingers. One of my players befriended the Drow Street gang so they could get a gun.
Good points for RPGs. Though I'm not much for firearms, I've always appreciated your sense of gun safety in your videos (keeping your finger off the trigger when showing a gun and such). Good insights in incorporating guns into a fantasy setting, and still keeping "safety first" with guns. Keep up the great videos.
The crossbow in 5E is basically a gun. Even with no feats you get 1 shot per turn, meaning you can shoot it as fast as a low level character can swing a sword. Shields and armor don't stop it because all you have to do is roll higher than the enemy's AC. Since the encounters have to be represented by a board laid out on a table, you can usually shoot all the way across the battlefield.
I may be mistaken, but crossbows have the loading trait, so you need to use an action to load it, that's 1 shot every 2 turns if you don't have the crossbow expert feat or a special crossbow
@@luigiff3431 It reloads between turns without the feat. All it says is that you can only shoot it once per attack action regardless of the number of attacks you have. It doesn't say you have to take an action to load it.
@@cjams115 That logic only applies if you're playing munchkiny character-focused 3.x to 5E. If you're playing older editions, OSR, house-ruled 5E, or simply some non-D&D ruleset entirely the relevant options may not even exist... but crossbows probably will still be in the game, the relative distances using minis at the table will be similar, the c-bows still have some kind of loading restriction because that's part of the fiction around crossbows.
In my experience there are 3 categories of implementation for early firearms: 1: Pathfinder method, where they scale terribly and exist as a way for excited new players to blow their characters' hands off whilst paying more than they'd pay for a magical crossbow (which is also terrible compared to anything other than guns) that can shoot faster and more reliably, running ammo that's more varied and a fraction of the cost of their bullet counterpart. 2: Lamentations of the flame princess method, where they're pretty much one use per encounter and will howitzer something flat. (This is usually in games with a lot of fragile combatants, so it becomes a game of appraising who's worth the shot.) 3: DnD method: Reskinned crossbows/wands but with less ammo variety and far higher expense. Edit: Props to Skal, after watching the whole episode he really hit the key points on this one.
The problem for Critical Role is that they’re anti-gun. You’ve got Percy saying firearms are far too dangerous to exist and everyone agrees… in a world full of monsters that are constantly laying waste to villages and people can literally summon a storm of meteors…
Though it would take most wizards countless years of studying and refining their powers to do stuff like Meteor Swarm or other 9th level spells. In comparison, it’s a lot easier for some peasant to pick up a flintlock, get trained with it, and shoot down people who have had to spend longer on mastering conventional warfare. Hence, Percy was afraid of the potential that mass-produced weapons could unleash on the world.
@@zombieshark803 kind of like how anyone can shake hands with a greater being and have access to eldritch blast? A cantrip which is pretty easily more powerful and versatile than a flintlock. Mind you, a heavy crossbow easily packs a higher punch than a flintlock or even a musket too.
The reason firearms are dangerous is because anybody can use them at very near the maximum capability of the weapon. It's not an issue of power, it's an issue of ease of use. Normal people, even in the world Critical Role plays in, can't use magic, and aren't skilled enough to survive in combat with monsters. Guns fundamentally change the level of lethality across the board. It's not an anti-gun stance. It's a practical worldbuilding stance. The existence of guns would allow a literal baby to kill a party of fledgling heroes, all superhuman in their own right, on accident.
while it's true guns are mediocre at very high levels where people are supermen, but at low level they decimate everything. peasant with a gun could slaughter a low level party. edit: actually if bows and crossbows can get better with supernatural materials/enchantments, why not guns? plus a wizard could enhance the explosion in the gun making it even better as long as the materials can withstand it.
For those who might think a modern metallic centerfire cartridge is a bit of a stretch for their fantasy game I might suggest some of the very early breech loading rifles that used paper cartridges. A good example is the Dreyse Needle Rifle which was the first bolt action breech loader and used a needle like firing pin to stab through a self contained paper cartridge and strike a percussion cap embedded inside.
More of, take a look at far older discovered or preserved guns. Forgotten weapons has a video on a 15th century wheellock musket that uses metallic cartridges as well as a separate video on repeating guns that predate the industrial revolution
Oh I know about a lot of those very very early repeating arms. I was just providing an easy alternative to some of the firearms that Skal was presenting. Kinda in between the muzzle loader and the trapdoor Springfield he had. Also as a DM I would hate trying to figure out how to stat block something like a Chambers gun or something of the sort.
Early self-contained metallic cartridges were made from rolled brass foil or sheet that was soldered to a primed brass base. Pretty achievable for some skilled medieval craftsmen. Primed paper cartridges might actually be a bit more difficult, as they demanded quality paper of consistent thickness to make.
Great topic well handled And Percy's pepperbox being nerfed isn't to depower the gun it's so they can introduce power creep as he tweaks his design and improves slowly over the story
@@fanusobscurus funny you should mention hell. The List was inhabited by a demon from The Abyss, but spoilers follow Later in game Vox Machina travels to the nine hell's at which point Percy writes up a contract with a devil, because he figures his soul is already damned so he doesn't want any of his friends to do so.
As I recall, Percy's pepperbox only broke on a Natural 1 (which is a Critical Fail); and was described as misfiring sometimes when his dice rolls meant he would have missed the target anyway. I could (probably am) wrong on this; a quick search didn't confirm or deny my recollection. It's been a while. (**everyone in the background** It's been a whiiiiile) I had written this whole thing about DnD rules, but erased it instead of starting an argument. In the end, the rules are guidelines, the point of DnD is to have fun, and if you're not having fun, you're in the wrong group. Well, likely in the wrong group. Communication is key to a good DnD experience; so check in as a group. Find out what everyone's looking to get out of the game, and discuss things as a group. Maybe the ranger learns to use a rifle; now they have to worry about magical ammo because late game, a lot of creatures have resistance to non-magical piercing/bludgeoning/slashing damages. Low rolls could mean the gun jammed or a cartridge misfired instead of describing it as a miss, which is also fine, bullets whizzing by your head, or that odd angle that meant it ricochet off a piece of plate armor, it's all fine. Most firearms on D&D Beyond are pretty on-par with casters. Warlock's Eldritch Blast cantrip (unlimited casting of those!) does 1d10, plus bonuses from invocations, and fires multiple with more levels. Maybe they fire their eldritch blast through a long gun instead of a spell focus, or their hand. From a decent range, you can use a bow or crossbow to stealthily snipe enemies. Can't do that with a lever action rifle that emits a bright flash and a loud POP with every shot. So maybe the gun breaks stealth every time, while archers and crossbowmen can roll stealth vs target's perception roll. I don't want to say DnD might not be for some people, but people who think their fantasy game needs to be as real as possible rarely really enjoy DnD or Pathfinder; and there are other systems out there for those kinds of games. Dungeons & Dragons is not a blanket term for tabletop role playing game; it's a brand. Reach out, expand, communicate, and most importantly, find the right people to play with. Thank you for your time, and good night! o/
The misfire rule for the guns came from pathfinder 1e which has each gun get a misfire value (typically a natural 1 or 2) to represent early firearms jamming, breaking, or otherwise not working when shot. The misfire value can change depending on the type of ammunition, class abilities, or even magical enchantments used. For example, a PF1e Pepperbox has a default misfire of a natural 1 to 2 but using paper ammunition increases it to 1 to 3.
I like to run my games as realistic as possible and let the magic be the exceptions. But I also rarely go past level 10 or so super high level games just feel like fantasy painted super heroes
Yep, pretty much. For some reason, players and GMs remember that being shot kills people, but forget that being skewered with a heavy crossbow kills people, and you can't really dodge bolts at thirty feet any more than you can dodge bullets.
Yeah I don't get why people act like a gun would do 5x as much damage as a heavy crossbow bolt, and the game already has people dodging lightning. But suddenly a gun is some insurmountable weapon.
Just make it as realistic as possible, it takes way longer to reload a muzzleloader than it does a bow or crossbow unsheathing a sword or casting a spell. There's a reason they had bayonets to charge like a spear due to the long reload time. It all balances out.
You ever see someone reloading a historical crossbow? Even with the faster, lower draw weight ones it's still several seconds per shot. A heavy windlass bow is really slow. Fire rate for a muzzle loading musket and a crossbow is fairly similar. Bow is obviously considerably quicker, and swords can be drawn in moments, but comparing a muzzle loader to a crossbow is actually a pretty fair comparison for fire rate.
Yeah but to compensate you had 10 or 20 guys in ranks to keep up waves of fire every few seconds. Not exactly something that fits with a small squad of Murder Hobo- I mean Adventurers
@@LurchTheBastard I have an old school wood and steel crossbow, if you use a winch it isn't that slow. I also have a hand assembled muzzleloader kit that I shortened (easier and faster to ram the round) and have hand made paper cartridges and I hunt with it every year. If it was me with an unloaded crossbow vs. me with an unloaded muzzleloader the muzzleloader me would be dead, period. Most people have no idea how hard it is to prime a pan with just the right amount of powder when your adrenaline is rushing if it's a cap gun even better luck fumbling with that when you have the shakes. If it's raining considerably and you have to reload you had better have something else handy or you're definitely dead. People read too many fantasy books and don't realize what your body does with a weapon under stress and duress until it happens too them.
There are problems with 'realistic as possible" take - and quite few of them, actually. We have Pathfinder 1st edition as great example of poor firearms (and even crossbows) balance. First - most of the tabletop RPG's (if not all of them) are turn based. Even in okaishly optimized party combat can end in something like 2-3 rounds. Each round takes 6 seconds, so realistic as possible reload makes you standing for at least one whole turn and doing nothing (and thats what core rules says you to do). Not only it makes a lot of ranged options unviable but it just not fun at all. And second - you can by using some character feats and equipment make reload much faster (to the point there its nearly non existent), but if with crossbows this just put it in line with other ranged weapons, firearms by default ignore any armor. Sure, they dont do a lot of damage (still okay) but due to how armor in PF and DnD works you practically cannot miss. Im sorry if this comment made your eyes bleed, english isnt my native language
That's one of the things I liked about the open 20 system that was used in D&D, D20 Modern, and Star Wars for a time. It really wasn't that hard to mix and match. GURPS was another system that had that ability. Traveler was set up so you could land your scout ship on a medieval world and have some fun. I've never been a purest when it came to fantasy gaming. That's why it's called fantasy gaming in the first place.
Hi Skall. Just a quick tip for the lever action usage - don't put all 3 fingers in the loop, leave your pinkie on the bottom out of the loop. That way you won't have to drive the action as much with turning the whole wrist and will be able to reload way faster - just snap it with a flick of the wrist, the lever will easily rotate around those two fingers. Try it in a dryfire practice and you will see it is much faster and way more comfortable and less tedious on your weapon hand :) Have a great holiday season :)
Irl a great number of newly trained shooters with cheap weapons was often better than a small number of eltie fighters with quality gear. This is the reason knigths and bowmen slowly got replaced by soldiers and arquebusiers. Bow: crafting speed ++ precision + minimal strength requ. (8/10) Crossbow: crafting speed - precision ++ minimal strength requ. (5/10) Handgonne: crafting speed ++ precision -- minimal strength requ. (1/10)
Eeeeeeeh..... KIIIIIIIIINDA. Like... At the end of the day a bunch of rifles in a line can still fire with much greater accuracy than a line of crossbows who still have to fire at an angle. Plus as distance goes on the rifle becomes better than a crossbow.
In my fantasy world, there are places where people have medieval technology and places where people have sci-fi guns. I balanced them by making guns countable usually by a combination of techniques. For example some people can slightly shift the trajectory of the bullets, but order to not get hit they usually also have to be moving in the opposite direction. They basically have to block and dodge at the same time, which can be taken advantage of. Stuff like that makes it take an increased level of strategy to use guns effectively, at least in small scale combat
you could also easily think up a dune type shield for a battle mage where fast moving objects above a bow like a gun and cross bow have their projectile slown reducing their ap ( to a level where it wont pen your armour )or damage upon hitting the target.
This does help me think of more ways to balance out firearms, and the lore behind them, in a setting a few friends and I are working on. It's basically gone from thinking of the setting as a medieval-ish fantasy to a something I call "Medieval Sci-fi."
I find that Pathfinder balanced guns very effectively. They had very high crit multipliers and hit on touch AC, but you couldn't apply your strength or dexterity to damage, and you either had to deal with how long they take to reload, or take a specific series of feats to reduce it to a swift action. They had clear downsides that prevented them from being a particularly common choice, while still being effective enough to make for interesting builds, such as gun magus, and even an entire class based around them, the gunslinger.
@@youmukonpaku3168 okay, sure enough. Some more magic to the gun, and it'll be smoke- and residueless too. Which mean an enchanted weapon ... and for the same amount of gold, with much cheaper ammunition, you could probably get a crossbow that's about as effective. Still doesn't answer the question of what's the RAW (rules as written) concerning noise from guns in Pathfinder?
The touch AC thing was only within their first range increment which was typically either within charge range or very close to it. But the same book did include more modern firearms which did it within the first, I think, five range increments. The modern guns weren’t part of the assumed setting (outside if that one part of Reign of Winter) but a lot of people had a very knee jerk reaction and claimed guns were overpowered. Another comment on the video mentioned how Pathfinder 2e did it which seems to have been a good midpoint. They have the same reload time as crossbows (so one action for most and a couple of particularly heavy ones needing two - you get three actions a turn, BTW) but lower base damage. But they all have the Fatal trait - when you land a crit, you change the the damage die to one two steps higher (so a flintlock pistol that normally does 1d4 damage has you reaching for your d8s instead), double the roll for the crit, and then roll *another* die of that size. So an arquebus on a normal hit does 1d8 damage but then if you land a crit with one you’re functionally doing 3d12 damage instead. *At level one.* They also removed the need for a specific kind of proficiency and just rolled them into the base three weapon tiers (Simple, Martial, and Advanced) so anyone with blanket simple weapon proficiency (which is every class except for the wizard) can use the more basic firearms like the aforementioned flintlock pistol without any further investment.
Loving it Skall, as a DM for the last 30 years iIhave never had any issues with introducing Firearms, as a matter of fact D&D wise rules for Firearms go back to 2nd Edition, hell one of the oldest adventures written by Mr. Gygax himself takes place on a crashed spaceship with lasers and energy swords
If I'm not mistaken (and I most likely am) wasn't the adventure with the spaceships, lasers and energy swords tied into the City of the Gods set in Greyhawk? or was it tied into the old Blackmoor setting?
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS VIDEO. I've always hated when a GM or player says something like "Ugh, why are you ruining my immersion? You are just trying to be overpowered." While they load up their THIRD FREAKING 8D6 FIREBALL or 5D6 SNEAK ATTACK DAMAGE PER ATTACK. No, my single action revolver that deals 1d8 piercing is overpowered.
I was looking for a comment like this lol. In a setting where a wizard can spit out fireballs and other destructive magic, is a revolver/rifle really that crazy? Especially if it's a setting where someone can learn or train to be a wizard or use magic without having to be born with some innate gift. At that point it's just becoming a rifleman but with extra steps.
@@IB-xk5se I mean even in 5e a wizard is suppose to be one with rather intensive training of years to be able to do what they do. Even the fighter and ranger at level 1 are suppose to have years of training and have more experience than the average melee and range combatant. The OP argument also stems from the idea that you can theoretically train an army in a few weeks in the use of firearms and you now have a group of people on par with said fighters and rangers in terms of effectiveness, with just enough killing power that now you don't have to rely on wizards for hitting things hard. Though this is dependent on what state firearms are in, since a medieval firearm is going to function very differently to say an AR-15.
Isn't a gun just a reskinned crossbow? Better ammo count and damage but longer reload, but it costs far more to make and get ammo (like anyone counts ammo)
One way I've worked around this is with fire magic. The ability to expand sources of fire and increase the size of explosions. So guns can be really effective as long as a fire mage isn't present. Because if one is, that weapon in your hand becomes a bomb as soon as you pull the trigger.
Thanks for helping drill this idea into peoples' heads. I use up to early Renaissance guns in my D&D homebrew (up to matchlock but I might try wheellock too), they're not OP due to cost and reload times and I make them not work in rain. And top tier plate armor can potentially soak a fair amount of the damage from most of them, though I've added the "Heavy Arquebus" as well. Often times, players will fire a shot and then switch to melee due to the reload times.
Nice. I allow my players to go all the way in my own homebrews. I figure do what you want just be warned that actions have consequences. Several years ago I had a guy that wanted to be Halo's Master Chief in a world where the most advanced weapon was a flintlock. I said no problem. He used his big pretty assault rifle in two battles and ran out of ammo that couldn't be replaced. His other achievements include being the only character to get killed before endgame (twice) and accidentally shooting his girlfriend's character. Good times.
Wheel lock will work in rain pretty well. Flint lock would replace match lock fairly quickly as well. The primary need is a good spring which the match locks did not need.
And if you have a Japan equivalent in your world, you should give them Tanegashima, which, among *other* improvements, had a lacquer box fitted over the firing mechanism to *protect* it from moisture, and thus allow it to fire even *in* the rain or mist or fog. Oh, and by the way, there was a member of the Tanegashima family called *Samurai-Zutsu* ; firearms made specifically *for* Samurai to wield, and their *very* different sense of honor from ours made them consider it dishonorable to *not* use Tanegashima. Just wanted to take the opportunity to *debunk* that myth.
This is why the german blunderbuss axe was so effective in the medieval period, with how much info was mentioned in the video, I am shocked that it wasn’t mentioned along side with the bayonets
This is a really interesting discussion, and particularly something I love about urban fantasy. A lot of the superhuman nature of people like the barbarian who can shrug off a great axe is trimmed away and the gun is really the equalizer. Being that superhumanly durable, or weilding magical powers, these are the domain of things which are in general not human and greater than. Guns are how we mere mortals have a fighting chance. Such setting also tend to play even harder into the vulnerability trope, like if you want to kill a faerie, of course you need cold iron. Or silver for a werewolf, etc. Leveraging technology and ingenuity to defeat fowles who are far stronger, tougher, deadlier in every conceivable way but are beastial, or ancient and inflexible. Creatures who cannot adapt as humans have.
Something to remember with muzzle loaders is the "Mad Minute"- an old show of skill where soldiers would try to load and fire as many rounds as possible within one minute, and it was considered skillful to get off three rounds in that one minute. So if you want to implement something like that, perhaps have it where reloading is broken into sections- perhaps loading the barrel and priming the powder, with each as a bonus action if not moving or an action if moving, that cannot be completed on the same turn. This would replicate the mad minute, allowing a little over three rounds per minute of combat (each round in D&D lasts 6 seconds, so nine rounds for three shots from empty). You would have to make the damage large to compensate, but it would also encourage carrying multiple guns like in real life for higher rate of fire.
Would like to add the range & damage starting out could be limited by rifling a barrel being extremely expensive as no one wants to get hit with a class A misdemeanor because of one vicious tyrannical guild. Reality and world building.
@@MrYago-xd7um Unnecessary, because reloading a rifled musket is slower than reloading a smoothbore - it takes more time to ram the ball in. That was why armies often didn't use rifled muskets even when the tech existed for a long time. Rifles were, at one time, associated with sharpshooters and hunters.
In AD&D 2e, ranged weapons get different rates of fire. By comparison, most people make one sword or spear swing per turn. Weapon proficiencies gave you additional attacks at higher level for both missile and close weapons (or removed extra reload turns). A bloke with a bow can get off two shots per turn, same if a git tosses knives at you. Darts are the fastest weapons around, a dude can toss out three darts each turn and together they hurt more than people think. A light crossbow could fire once a turn, heavier crossbows could need one or two turns just reloading. I can't remember what an arquebus had, but there was rules for using them and high-tech weapons.
*Thank you so much for spreading this lesson to people, Skallagrim!* This is mainly the reason why the Gunslinger is my favorite class in Pathfinder 2E. No other class for me, I'm a Gunslinger guy, through and through!
i use the rules for blackpowder weapons in Grim Hollow. Basically they make noise and can be heard up to 300ft away like the spell Thunderwave. and they don't work if wet, then they need to dry. damage wise the ones we got in the rules are not op.
“The feeding ramp is polished to a mirror sheen. The slide’s been reinforced. And the interlock with the frame is tightened for added precision. The sight system is original, too. The thumb safety is extended to make it easier on the finger. A long-type trigger with non-slip grooves. A ring hammer… The base of the trigger guard’s been filed down for a higher grip. And not only that, nearly every part of this gun has been expertly crafted and customized.”
In OSR games, one level 0 peasant with a Garand can mess up a hero pretty well. But so can a desperate store clerk with an axe. Don't pick senseless fights is the lesson. A name level figter in old D&D would get an army. You got to recruit units with hundreds of level 0 men-at-arms. 50 men-at-arms with crossbows can be a fair threat to a lot of stuff. As a level 10 wizard, you got to sit back in a chair and enjoy that you were a level 10 wizard-
I think you make some great points skall. I never really thought about it much. I always figured it was setting and balance wise. Range and rate of fire mostly along with ease of use being most important. Especially when it comes the other ranged weapons. But like you said, you can fix this with balancing and limiting the type of firearm. Like just making them single shot or gunpowder that takes ages to load. Modern repeating ones, even semi-auto or the repeating rifle you used are probably not gonna work without some serious damage nerfs.
I'm starting to introduce firearms into my DnD campaign, I realized I can balance them easily enough by limiting the availability of the weapons and consumables, and if my players are interested I can make a whole adventure just for them to acquire them, if things get out of hand I can easily get the gods involved and that's just more adventure!
i think thats the proper way to limit their power. ita logic to.assume that they are rare and expensive, also cery limited and difficult to acquire. But a proficient player with a decent firearm should be powerful in dnd.
What about cover in combat? This gives melee a strat to fight both ranged users (bows, crossbows, but also magic-users), via hiding behind cover in the area that either raises their armor class or has a durability/hp amount an absorbs some/all of the damage of attacks directed towards someone behind that cover. I always try to not look at how to downplay or reduce someone in my games, but look at how logically in a setting the area would change, and looking at how gunfights are irl it goes around taking cover, and so developing a system around that concept leads to believability.
In my fantasy setting theirs a few guns (cannons,flintlocks,ect.) But the newest tech is breach loaders! I feel thats perfect for my use. And they had revolving rifles and pistols in the 1500s, so I'm OK with the lot of that stuff if you got the money for it.
I need to show this to my friend. :D He wrote stories where are flying steampunk ships, ballistas, mechanic golems, knights, rogue hunters, magic... But anything that do BANG is "unbalancing" everything. :D He is arguing with something like "yeah, its about art of fight, they need to train hard and sword fighting is about who is better". He absolutely forgot about bows, crossbows etc. Its steampunk, we created this world togeather. He just never shot from anything.
@@jonathanwells223 He's just not fan of firearms and in his eyes firearms dont belong to that world. :D i say they fit there. No need to make them like guns today, but pepper box guns, percussion revolvers, muskets, they fit in that world perfectly. Same as crossbows, swords, bows, spears. Lets say our character have shotgun. Two barrels. Is ambushed by group of bandits. So he tooks two of them instantly, but what about others?
The biggest problem of firearms in fantasy is not that it's overpowered, but that they can be easily mass produced, unlike magic and dragons, so to speak. So once you introduce firearms, the "common folks" of the setting will change the greatest and the power balance will shift towards them.
Firearms were truly the great equaliser. Sure that wizard spent decades mastering the divine arts and sure, they can call down a meteorite to level a city, but Farmer McPeasant has had a month training with his rifle and can put a £2 wide hole through centre mass of a human sized target, at 300 metres before said Master of the Arcane arts is even aware that they're there.
There are other factors that come with firearms - for example, grenades. They are much easier to make, require less skill, and can be spammed (if you have enough of them). They can also be utterly devastating, depending on what you pair them with - e.g. some sort of magic shrapnel. You can also easily pair them with regular melee weapons since you can throw a couple of grenades into a room full of monsters before rushing in. Also, you can get flash-bangs which could be utterly devastating in places like dungeons.
Very cool content. Was trying to get our DM to get into some gun play or even do a "Dark Tower" style campaign. Also, nice rifle! The side loading Henry is a definite upgrade to the tube feed.
I once DM'd an apocalypse themed DnD-esque game in which I tried to emphasize the necessity for use of both melee combat (and magic where applicable) in tandem with guns. The guns were anything but nerfed. Most enemies could be put down with a couple good shots from even a pistol. The way that I worked around the possibility of the players steamrolling enemies was by emphasizing ammo counts and reload speed. Sure, one or two shots from a rifle could take down an enemy, but that would be two of four bullets that they've got access to gone, with no telling how long it'll be until more show up. That and the need to reload after a given amount of shots made melee a much more attractive option for the players when they weren't fighting a large foe, and it made the gun players think a lot more about their attacks than the magic and melee players.
You've given me some great RPG character ideas :) Custom alchemist class - clockwork guns, ammo would consume ingredients and have to be pre-loaded before leaving camp like a mage preparing a spell. Muzzle-loaded guns could be used in combat without prep, with maybe 3 turns to load and one to fire.
Not exactly. They are for us, humans. But with literal giants and immortals around, even basic bow becomes a weird factor with strength levels and skill masteries involved. And that's before magic enters the room by breaking down the door... And then even more broken magic breaks down all walls too. Try playing "Gate" scenario against a bunch of tabletop munchkins, who abuse mind control, resurrection, teleportation and so on. Wonder Woman and Thor are literary RPG protagonists in "modern setting":D
Melee weapons are still useful today. It's just that the types & situational contexts have changed a bit. These days it's all about up close & personal wrestling type situ's mostly. Something very similar to rondel dagger in armor style stuff as well some other "got nothin' else" SHTF scenarios.
Old Warhammer Fantasy (before the End Times and creation of Age of Sigmar) I think did a good job using firearms in a fantasy setting. Plus they got to have some fun creating their own fantastical gunpowder based units like the Empire Steam Tank or the Dwarf Flame Cannon.
I think guns could work like "magic" equivalent to bows. Like magic needs materials at higher lvl to use, just make ammo for guns expensive. At the moment I think many play bows etc in a way that you don't even need to buy arrows. So basically you get a buff to your ranged option by spending more money.
There's a lot you can do using muzzle-loaders that take forever to shoot more than once, but I actually did the opposite. Instead of using black powder, there's this magical rust-like substance which has a side effect of slowly dissolving the projectile as it flies, heavily limiting the effective range. It's super-light so you can carry loads of shot, has lowered recoil and chamber pressure so fairly advanced loading mechanisms are available much earlier than expected, and the stuff is so plentiful that nobody has found the need to experiment with a replacement. What's cool about this, in addition to giving melee a chance to close in with guns, is that bows keep their niche as light, mobile artillery. You can have actual artillery too, and the grueling battles they imply, but the guns are only a charge away from being overrun. Same applies for naval battles, so boarding is favored.
I think the range of the Sharps or other "buffalo guns" could be an issue in a fantasy campaign. You get to reach out and touch someone from well out of range most magic attacks. Still not the only weapon available to a character though.
A longbow can launch an arrow several hundred meters, at about 100 meters the front post of the irons on my AR15 covers a human-sized target. Not saying that a bow is comparable in accuracy or damage, but in a fantasy setting I don't think the range is all that different, especially sans-optics.
@@TheWarmotor Max LB range in D&D is 200 yards at penalty, 50 yards with no penalty. TBH it's not THAT much of a stretch to say firearms in your fantasy world have a similar range. Either way it's so far off the battle grid that you're just making up numbers anyway. :P It's pretty rare for D&D campaigns having much interaction going on at that distance. Cities, dungeons, forests and what not. I mean even in situations like sieges/battles you could almost argue that bows have a bit of an advantage. It's hard to arch a bullet over a wall/hill. :P
Meteor Strike has a casting range of one mile. It's basically magical artillery. And most shooting is only really done at 300 yards/meters when done with small arms. There are plenty of spells and other DnD weapons that can effect that range.
just balance them the same exact way we do in real life. ammo scarcity. edit: also, please let the Fighter have more long ranged options that benefit from their martial proficiency. (multi-attack is hardcore locked down by ranged and that's just unfair) think of the Fighters!
Good points. I think the best kind of storytelling to get ideas for balancing guns and melee weapons might be post-apocalypse stories. In those settings, guns are powerful weapons, but because ammo is usually very limited, melee weapons can be a great alternative. You might run out of bullets, but a machete will not need to be reloaded. The movie The Book of Eli I think really captures this idea well.
In a setting where people who can turn into Kaiju, create massive circles of fire, throw lightning, and create an army of undead, a guy with a gun is not that overpowered
It is very overpowered at the lower level and can stop everyone else from achieving said land changing feats in the first place. Having the potential is nice and all, but you need to GET THERE in the first place.
@@rpk321 There are magic swords and armour which would also be overpowered for low-level characters, but these are largely balanced around being hard to find or prohibitively expensive for such a character. In a setting where firearms are that powerful yet not common, it would make sense for them to be balanced in the same manner.
@@PhiloticSymmetrist You Don't even HAVE access to them in the beginning in the first place. Not that they are super rare or expensive. There come a point where something provide so much value that increasing the cost means nothing. So either you lock it up or reduce the value provided.
@@jonathanwells223 Or you accept your guns suck because it is unbelievably difficult to balance without throwing out the fun for the one who choose gun or for everyone else.
That's the cheap and easy equalizer I use for any magic, firearms, hypertech laser swords etc. If you have a spell or a kevlar vest you don't have a monopoly on it. If you have the thing, the next gnoll you run into might just as well have the thing. Now there's three goblins with looted revolvers yelling to toss over the food.
One way I've seen the ranged vs melee solved in multiple stories was that ranged weapons require each projectile to be enchanted, as well as the ranged weapon itself, and in another one there were certain effects that required a good power source (sci-fi for that one, but the principle can still apply) which was unsuitable for projectiles. In that last one explosives could use such effects, but were of course single use. As many have mentioned already, bows are much stealthier, but another good point for them is that you can recover your ammo, and even if an arrow has broken you can fletch a new one out in the wilds. A gun would be completely limited to the ammo you bring with you, unless you have a jury-rigged style weapon where you throw gunpowder in and any junk lying around, but even then you can only bring so much gun powder. And of course, lets not forget that smoke-less powder is a very different beast compared to black powder, smoke can build up and blind your position if indoors, smoke residue in the barrel can cause jamming. If the weapon has bigger tolerances it'd instead have shorter range/less power or simply lack in accuracy. Mixing some of those options you can easily have melee weapons being the best for armoured people and big targets that could simply ignore smaller wounds, guns for supporting close quarter melee fighters or initiating, arrows for silent take-downs or getting a critical hit like taking out an eye of a dragon before combat starts. And guns would be a problem in the wilderness, besides being more expensive to acquire and load, making them a poor choice for travellers, high-way bandits, but optimal for guards, armies, and so on.
I'm a big fan of how Code Vein incorporates the bayonette weapon type, as in rifles with permanently affixed bayonnettes. ... I mean, the guns fire literal blood in various flavours from long range to a fan of 5 going out in a 90degree arc, but still. The characters mainly use them as melee weapons and occasionally fire them when practical, usually as if they were swords or spears.
Ayyy a fellow Code Vein player! I definitely agree especially with how the magic system works. It’s more risky to fire your bayonet during a fight due to the lower damage than high grade spells but it tends to be lest costly as a result.
God eater 2 and 3 have that too. You eat bites to reload with your melee form, then you fire that energy back at the target with whatever gun type you happen to have equiped
I think magic (assuming it's even remotely common) would sharply limit guns' use on the battlefield. A wizard with Heat Metal could destroy a cannon instantly and take out the whole crew, or use Fireball and wipe out an entire platoon of musketeers.
One thing that I think would make it fair for firearms is caliber. You can go for higher calibers but each cartridge is gonna weigh more compared to lesser calibers and gonna have have more recoil, with some anti tank rifles having enough recoil to dislocate your shoulder if not used correctly. If you chose lower calibers you are gonna be able to carry more but they don’t do alot of damage. They’ll also cost differently, with higher and/or specialty cartridges gonna cost more than more common low caliber ammunition.
Makes me wonder if they actually tried that, but found the barrels to be too heavy to swing effectively. OR heavy enough to use as a bludgeoning device so they didn't need a bayonet.
The average DnD gun is no more powerful than a mundane crossbow or longbow, except they have a misfire chance, and immediately looses out once magic arrows enter the scene. People just can't handle that gunpowder was invented before high medieval knights were
"People just can't handle that gunpowder was invented before high medieval knights were" Really don't get your point here. Yes, gunpowder WAS invented before the traditional medieval knight. However its usefulness in battle was often questionable at best until firearms were invented and heavily refined, after which point firearms rendered knights obsolete. The point about how guns operate in DnD and other fantasy settings is perfectly reasonable. Guns kinda aren't OP when wizards can stop time and spam you with magic arrows or turn you into a sheep.
I helped a GM Friend figure out the solution to that problem. Worked out how magic based special ammo would work (Incendiary, Stun, Armor Piercing, etc) based on item lore. His personal favorite were Anti-Magic bullets. We also figured out that The Forgotten Realms has the technology level to make self contained cartridges rather than flintlock or cap & ball. So guns in his campaign were a viable option.
"Those staves... Is every soldier in their army a wizard?" "Yes. Those are magical weapons called "guns." The spell-caster uses fire magic to create a small spark inside the staff that triggers an explosion that is used to shoot out a small pebble."
One thing to remember : For some time the western frontier of the US was retracting due to the comanche being able to outgun or outbow US cavalry wich was using single shot fire arms , The comanche where using recurve bows and where doing a pretty unique shooting tecnique in wich they held arrows the bow hand and shooting from the bow hand side , Allowing them to shoot with both high precision and a high fire rate ... The tide turned with the revolver wich could match the firing rate of the comanche bow and the rest is history ... But still , bows can compete against guns , heck revolvers and lever actions where specifically made to outgun bows , you also have the whole fact that this was effectively a pre industrial/industrial state with a large population and a professional army was fighting against basically steppe nomads and a reason for the US being able to succed was also them driving bisons to almost extinction to do scorched earth against the comanche , But that's a whole can of worms ... What i was saying is that a bow requires much lower tolerances and less specialized work to be crafted , compared to a revolver , expecially if the blacksmith guild is keeping the revolver manufacturing process a secret to keep the monopoly , make an awful lot of money from it and convincing local nobles to give them a lot of money to devise new bigger cannons with stealth caracteristics ... Making revolvers and lever action guns somenthing that is kinda hard to get and somenthing you'd prefer to keep secret since everyone will try to steal those ... That combined with a much more whidespread bow culture in wich bows are shot all the times to defend from monters and stuff could be a nice explaination as to why revolvers and bows coexist
With a gun, you can have up to three weapons in one: the gun itself, the buttstock as a bludgeon and possibly a bayonet, which can make a rifle act like a pike.
A wizard that can throw a fireball maybe 4 times maximum before needing a full 8 hours seems pretty weeny compared to an armed mob of angry peasants with guns, and I'm all for it.
I mean, for me at least, it all depends on the setting of the world and the type of gun or weapons. For example, this anime Gate: Jietai shows how a trained modern army equipped with military guns, communication systems and other type of modern weapons like tanks, artillery and airborne vehicles, practically destroyed a fantasy medieval army like it was nothing and stormed a fortress in matters hours. Now try that same army against factions of Warhammer Fantasy for example, it won’t be as simple as the other one because they are more “powerful” because of the really hard magic of that world setting.
Judging how a Empire playthrough with with a gunpowder based army can kick ass, yeah but no, the JSDF will still steamroll any factions in warhammer fantasy especially when in Gate, they weren't even using modern weaponry as they still need to leave behind their prssent day equipment in Earth to defend against other nations. It won't be simple sure, but I highly doubt the factions will be doing much to Earth's military. The clans in Fall of the Samurai can probably single handedly defeat them especially with the armstrong cannons
Also, a police officer can tell you that if an attacker with a knife charges at the officer who has a gun (if the attacker is within 20 feet) they have a real chance at stabbing the officer. Guns are OP IRL, but in real life conflicts there are a lot of factors that can change who wins.
Seems to me the big issue with D&D players is they *want* firearms to be OP, because that is very action-moving "Ima god!" power rush feeling. But, in rules-as-written firearms are actually pretty dull, thus a lot of home-brewing (often resulting in OP, to make them "feel" more like modern power fantasy cinematic).
Honestly this. People want to argue that a bullet SHOULD be incredibly deadly...somehow more so than getting run through with a sword or having your helmet cleaved with an axe, apparently, which is where it suddenly makes no sense. Fantasy weapons are not somehow foam props that deal no damage compared to firearms...
Firearms as alternative magic delivery is always interesting. in dnd terms it can be a Dex caster with limited bonus (like medium armor has a max +2 from dex) from either int (for more methodological class/weapon) or cha (for more instinctual shooters). And different rounds can work like metamagic.
I didn't understand why I should make up a bunch of special rules. If a magic arrow can do a thing, there's a chance you find a magic Garand bullet that can also do the thing. The hobos just get a few shotguns and AR-10's together and mug a vampire, simple as that. You roll to hit, try to beat their AC and maybe you hit the goon. The guns do slightly different damage dice depending on caliber. Wizards tend to prefer pistols because they can easily stow them to do their magic, and they don't encumber as much. Then they can wear a kevlar vest.
@@SusCalvin coz it can be fun and we don't have a class like that? I mean we're talking about a game based on rule books with updates and expansions so make the rules if you want to. I just prefer rules embedded in the system rather than simple add-ons
@@amanita8397 My alternative is to just play a level 1 fighter with a shotgun with rules that can be summed up in a few paragraphs. You're a fighter, you got +1 to do the fighty stuff and now you do it with a shotgun. It's not a special weapon I need extra rules for. In the rules we test, they do 1d12 damage while a pistol does 1d8. A sword does 1d10. You obviously need to hold it in two hands, but you don't need to spell that out.
@@amanita8397 The downside with a crossbow is that you need to ready it by manually pulling a string back. I'll have to check what the bow/crossbow rules say in Esoteric. If you want the string to last, you shouldn't walk around with it pulled all the time. But you can hold it in a ready position and aim a lot easier. In MERP, crossbows acted slightly before bows. In AD&D 2e, missile weapons had different firing rate. A bow shoots two arrows per round. A dude with darts can toss three darts per round. A light crossbow shot once per round, and a heavy crossbow every second round. They did different damage at different range. A dude flicking three darts was surprisingly dangerous.
@@eainjones9509 I suppose the only weakness the Spartans would have would be that zombies never tire, so depending on the horde size it could last days. That being said, it’s amazing how much fighting ability humans have lost over the centuries as technology has improved.
@@Matt20911985 that may be true, and it is definitely size dependant, but what the zombies have as a disadvantage is the inability to defend themselves.
What's most important is the setting of your campaign. Maintaining the fantasy of your world. In my campaign I have a high fantasy setting where magic is commonplace, and technology is in early to mid Renaissance. Countries have navies with cannon, men-at-arms with pollaxe and halberd, and Wizards that can drop Meteors from the sky. I balance firearms as a specialized weapon. Some soldiers are specifically trained in use of early blackpowder firearms. However, in a world where you can call down the wrath of God to smite your enemies, guns are hardly overpowered. It's more about maintaining the fantasy for the players. They get to be the cool baddass they want to be with sword, Fireball, or musket.
This video feels like a personal note from Skall to a DM who denied him a gunslinger class at his local DnD group😆
LOL!!! 😁😁😂😂🤣🤣😭😭💀💀😩😩
It adds up, he did say that rifle is new and not broken in yet. New rifle might equal new idea for role playing.
He’s specifically said that he doesn’t play Dungeons and Dragons but I still see your point
@@matthewquan9083 He has, but I kind of feel like Skall has done enough research for these videos that he's going to end up playing tabletop games at some point. Of course he may already, he just said that he didn't play D&D. There's tons of other games out there, some much better systems than D&D.
I don't think there should be a special gunslinger class. Play a level 1 fighter with a SPAS or a Garand.
Remember: the cooler and more complex your power system is, the funnier it is when a character shows up with a gun.
"so what kind of crazy and wacky power do you have"
"i have a gun"
"oh... its some kind of magical gun or something like that"
"well i thing .500 S&W magnum is pretty magical on its own right"
Not really. You can have your rifle I'll keep my spells. Untill you get into modern weapons its not that big of a difference.
"Sokka, where did you get a gun?!"
@@Ashtor1337 Oh don't get me wrong. Spells are way more versatile overall. I just think it's funny that in terms of pure offensive power, guns can often match up to "special" powers featured in all sorts of series.
Indeed, especially when the gun is redundant, very funny there
Elephant guns seem like a good example of how much gun people thought was necessary for an elephant, and then you can extrapolate that to fantasy monsters
Though if rocket launchers, shaped charges, and recoilless rifles exist in a fantasy setting, then fighting monsters just becomes a slightly less difficult form of anti-tank warfare and air defense.
Fr elephants have 76 HP .average people have like 3-6 . A young blue dragon has 152 HP meaning they have exactly double the durability of an elephant so elephant guns would definitely put the hurt on them . People really underestimate modern weapons especially the heavy ones . Tldr like 20 guys with elephant guns beat just about any dnd creature under like cr 15-20 not counting ghosts or other shenanigans
@@codbeast914 thats part of the weirdness of the D&D system. Elephants have massive amounts of health letting them shrug off 4 bolts of lightning or a fall from orbit with some HP left over yet historically were also killed with a small pick to the back of the head that in D&D does 3 damage on average
I think Vermintide had the perfect approach towards making guns not OP which was
1. You wanna save those bullets for when the enemies *also* have guns (or magic/anything ranged) because you're getting constantly overwhelmed.
2. Penetrating armor is nice and all but when your opponent is 700 pounds of muscle and his chest is 3 feet+ thick a steel pebble going through him isn't going to much better than an axe.
The ammo limitation feels pretty well balanced in the normal levels at least. Boss fights on the other hand, there are no ammo drops; making ammo-based ranged weapons completely useless compared to overheat-based ranged weapons.
@@novacorponline or abusing ranged weapon class traits like huntsman, engineer and other stuff
If you hit him in the head with said pebble it will go splat... from 50m. While the sword needs to be a lot closer...
.... my God is this comment stupid.
This literally depends on the round being fired. At 1000m a .50cal SLAP round will penetrate 1.5in of Hardend steel armor designed to stop bullets. These same round at 100m will go through a 3ft thick wall and a person. How do I know this? I've seen it.
A .357 magnum was designed to kill any thing in N. America with a single shot. That includes Grizzly Bears. Hell a .357 Magnum would go through the gorse I ride and she's 2500lbs draft horse whose breed is the largest horse breed in the world and holds the record for largest horse to ever live.
@@novacorponline The handgun is viable on highest difficulty because 16 well placed shots should be enough for any boss. Of course you won't kill most bosses with the musket alone, but it never felt underpowered. It's a matter of individual ability to place crits. Don't know about the other weapons though.
Another reason why guns might not simply outclass other ranged weapon options in a DnD setting is that they’re extremely loud. You can take someone out with a bow or crossbow relatively quietly. If you try to stealth with a boom stick you’re going to alert pretty much everyone to the fact that you’ve just fired a gun. This not only balances guns a bit but also adds a bit of depth to them.
Nice point
Can't recover ammunition either. Arrows can be reused most of the time in fantasy and sometimes irl, but gun ammunitions ? They literally just exploded.
@@xaviermantha63 Shoot, you can even make new arrows in the field by foraging sticks or whatever and carving them with a knife.
@@xaviermantha63 technially with old school musket ball it would be simple in fantasy to make more just take some metal and have the wizard shape it into tiny balls.
the gunpowder is the hard part run out of that in the field and you have no shot of just scrounging some up quick
Yet, due to the semantics of WotC's wording, firearms can still do Sneak Attack damage because Sneak Attack in game doesn't necessarily require you to lie prone on the ground, covered in mud and making as little sound as possible. It only requires you to make the attack with a ranged or finesse weapon, get advantage on the attack (with unseen attacker being the most sought after as a way to live up to the name) or to not have disadvantage and get an ally within 5ft of your target. The big benefit is the greater damage die. Using the DMG, muskets deal d12 piercing on a hit, the same damage die as a greataxe.
But going back to the original point, I once deafened my entire party in game firing my CR musket at a guard. That was funny. We could still fight but without ears to hear anything, my Mountain Dwarf Gunslinger was basically shouting gibberish in an attempt to pull off one liners Urist Boatmurdered style with every single shot.
Seeing Skall hold a lever-action rifle is something I never thought I would get to see.
Why, did you know he lives in Canada?
Why not? If you've watched his other videos you'd know that, like millions of Canadians, he has quite a few firearms!
And he is so handsome doing it, too!
Must be new
there is a whole gun playlist on the channel
This is also why HP isn't exactly used to say "this is how much blood is in your body" but rather your endurance and stamina. Attacks that hit aren't telling blows but small hits that get past your guard and sap your strength and stamina to stay in the fight the one that brings you to 0 being the actual good strike that brings you down.
I always thought of it as the kind of move where you maybe pull something saving your skin and can't do THAT again anytime soon.
what about attacks that poison you? or swallow whole? or lava?
@@mrosskne Poison is same as any other damage type and poison condition isnt super debilitating in 5e but getting cut by poisoned blade or stinger is all it takes. Swallow attacks and Lava are almost always followed by immense damage so no issues there XD
@@mrosskne Same thing?...I dont understand your question. If you get poisoned it is literally just you slowly getting worse and worse untill you get it treated..ya know...like you would imagine poison would do.
Swallowed is the same except it is usually acid damage slowly burining you untill you can't fight back anymore. Fire damage is the same..at some point you get too burned to move and you die....
Is it 100% realistic? No, obviously not. It is a game with god damn flying fire breathing lizards, literal magic and you are someone special with the powers to help others....it isn't supposted to be realistic it is supposted to be fun and make sense in the setting and I would genuinly state the HP in dnd as written works fairly well.
I've always preferred the rogue-like experience to HP. At high levels, HP can make a 1-shot kill almost (or perhaps literally if it is "balanced") impossible.
I can see why it is necessary for most campaigns. Combat is rarely avoidable for the entire campaign, most players don't want to reroll characters they put time, effort, and quite often emotional investment into, and rerolling characters often delays the game anyway.
To me, I prefer the low levels of D&D specifically because the first hit your character takes could be their last. There is more pressure to assess whether combat really is the best solution, and if it is how can you get the first blow. Thus, at higher levels I tend to prefer optional rules that make nat 20s especially dangerous.
Finally, I don't like how taking blows doesn't really debilitate the character. A "non-lethal" hit in real life could still mean a hand cut off, or hanging uselessly due to nerve damage. Plenty of hits will be lethal soon if not immediately addressed (I do like the opportunity to stabilize a character with
In a fantasy setting where you have fast shooting bows, and powerful single action firearms, crossbows can still be balanced to be viable. Slow rate of fire, but able to launch specialized munitions such as wooden stakes, nets, a grappling hook, and even alchemical vials (corrosive, explosive, gas, etc)
That's called a pump action shotgun.
@@bobjohnson1633 what pump action do you use that shoots wooden stakes?
@@ntfoperative9432 Wooden projectile at any rate. You can hand load just about anything
True, but this could be done to a certain degree with bullets, too. You couldn't fire a stake out of a gun, but you can fire silver bullets, but then, of course, you can also have silver tipped arrows, so that feels like kind of a toss up to me. Same goes for something like an Arcane Archer. Magic is magic, there's no rules saying you can't enchant bullets as well. However, because it's a less complex and specific mechanism for bows, you can kinda just launch whatever with it, it's really more of a fancy slingshot, whereas in a pinch you could use shrapnel or maybe some pebbles, but if you don't have bullets, and if they aren't the right type of bullet, the gun's useless.
Ultimately, though, none of this really matters. Role-playing games are aboot role-playing (it's in the damn name) and the specifics of combat mechanics are of tertiary importance. What matters is the role the weapons have in the setting of the game, and the ways in which players choose to use them. You can argue aboot balance all day, but when you're actually playing an rpg with firearms in it, you're thinking of character first, with combat simply being one possible means of resolving a conflict. Thinking tactically is for wargaming, role-players need to think dramatically. And when push comes to shove, you kill Dracula with a whip, werewolves with a cane, and mummies by taking away their tea.
@@princessmaly Be it video games or TTRPG, games will always have limitations for the sake of balance, as its what makes the difference between playing a game and just telling a cool story; however, in this case, some of the limitations are built into the weapon designs themselves. First off, the bow wouldn't work as a "fancy slingshot" able to use any random object as ammo, because the bow itself would get in the way of the projectile; therefore, it would be limited to only using ammo with similar dimensions and properties to an arrow (allowing the projectile to curve around the bow as the string propels it). A crossbow, on the other hand, could in fact work as a sort of slingshot, in the sense that you would be able to launch anything that can be propelled by its string. Obviously, the range and accuracy will vary depending on the projectile, but it is more plausible than attaching something heavy at the tip of an arrow, or stuffing it in a gun.
As for firearms, due to their method of propelling projectiles by means of a gunpowder blast, as well as the specific size of the chamber, the use of improvised/specialized munitions is limited. Hand loading random objects into the firearm could result in more trouble for the user than the target; for example: a vial of hazardous chemicals would shatter before exiting the barrel, due to the gunpowder detonation. Special ammo can be used, but it would need to be designed and crafted by a gunsmith to work properly with the firearm.
Now that we're on the subject of special munitions; yes, they all have access to silver and enchanted munitions, but the crossbow's design is the most fitting for the use of non-conventional ammo (such as the aforementioned vial); however, it would still be balanced by its low fire rate.
Adding magic into the mix, it would need limitations as well, because just as the arcane archer is able to imbue arrows with magic, an arbalist with access to the same magic could imbue any random object they load on their crossbow; so to avoid having a fancy slingshot able to shoot an infinite number of enchanted pebbles, let's say only specific materials (such as what's used on the arrowheads) can be imbued. Let's also make it so that the caster needs see what they are enchanting and its only active for a short time; this would make the bow the most optimal for the use of enchanted ammo, since the arrows can be imbued and shot in rapid succession. Now let's rule that lead is a material that can't be imbued, so not only does the gunner need to enchant and load each bullet individually before firing it, but they also need special bullets made of some magic conducting material, making firearms less ideal for magic ammo. But what if the reason lead can't be imbued is because it has anti-magic properties? What seemed like a drawback can be an advantage now, as magical beings would be extremely weak to lead bullets.
The magic rules can be applied any number of ways, but be sure to have limitations that make things interesting and balanced. Regardless of the supernatural elements of this fantasy setting, when it comes to the weapon designs, each has their own advantage and disadvantage:
Bow
+stealthy, special techniques (e.g: rapid fire, multi-shot, rain of arrows)
-requires full draw to maximize damage and range
Crossbow:
+versatile projectile launcher (AOE, crowd control, etc.)
-must be spanned before every shot
Firearm
+ consistent high damage (armor piecing, hollow point)
-recoil, single action, and requires reloading after a number shots
Its a bit tricky to translate this into turn based TTRPG combat system, but if we are going by the storytelling style you described, at least the feats you attempt would be more plausible if they fit the properties of the weapon you are using; lest you hit the back of your thumb with an enchanted pebble, when you chose to use a bow instead of a crossbow 😄
I would recommend The Ten Realms series by Michael Chatfield it is about two military types who get pulled into a martial arts fantasy world. A part of that book series that always amuses me is how hard the two main characters have to work to make firearms viable in a martial arts fantasy world where people can shrug off getting shot with a powerful sniper rifle. It does a good job showing how much work goes into the production side of making fire arms and ammunition.
How do they shrug off a sniper shot? Personal Shield magic like aura from RWBY series?
@@rayhanmustakim7073 higher innate durability due to the need to perform and withstand actions experienced at near supersonic speeds.
An isekai yeay
It reminds me a bit of X-Chronicles (a total conversion of UFO Defence where fantasy creatures get isekaied) where the orcs can tank several hits from 50. cals., and magic shields can stuff them entirely.
@@rayhanmustakim7073 The magic in the world operates on a what ever doesn't kill you makes you stronger kind of system. So by surviving a lot of punishment a person can have skin stronger than steel. It is common for some characters to intentionally injure themselves to improve their bodies durability even though the experience is incredibly painful.
The idea of a gun and sorcery themed dungeon amuses me, where guns and magic rule but the sword and other melee weapons are still used in hand to hand combat situations.
Shadowrun. Include cybernetic enhancements, weaponized eldritch horror and corporate hostile takeovers. Real hostile by the CEO personally who happens to be an Elder Dragon.
Pillars of Eternity has guns where their main use is piercing the arcane veil that wizards use, but also, because of how reloading works in the game, Wizards with guns actually are really strong - Ciphers, magic users that gain power from doing damage, even more so.
You can shoot once with your arquebus, and instead of reloading you just cast a bunch of spells until the fight ends.
There's no downside to guns if you never reload.
I love stories where magic and technology clash. The Fable games, Dresden Files, Arifureta, etc.
Final Fantasy 14 actually did this well with the conflict between the Garlean Empire and Eorzea. The Garlean had to adapt as their people are incapable of utilizing aether (magic), so they created Magitek weaponry and used gunblades. Throughout the history of FF14 (until Shadowbringers at least), Garlemald was a powerhouse thanks to its technological advancements. In the end though, it was ultimately a civil war that led to the collapse of the Garlean Empire, the aftermath of which is seen in Endwalker where Garlemald's city capital is nothing but smoldering ruins, the only surviving bit of technology that hasn't become hostile being a train station where the remaining civilians and Garlean soldiers use as a base of operations and a refuge to escape the danger
And Arcanum, don't forget Arcanum
Arifureta?
@@danentakoto2701 Ignore that one. They don't seem to understand what Balance is.
@@danielantony1882 I think I have that but I forgot what it was about.
As a gm who has tried to work guns into a dnd setting before, the hardest balance was making them powerful enough to make them feel impactful enough to use, without making them instant kill machines. It was rough at first, but after about a year and a half we had a system that was working, and it was cool to see a more range and movement based campaign of 3.5e
Legit just make em
-loud
-deal a single die more than the crossbow/bow equivalent (hand crossbow=pistol,heavy crossbow=sniper/heavy rifle, long bow=musket/standard rifle, heavy crossbow with less range range=shotgun/blunderbuss)
-incapable of arcing your shot
-if you keep track of ammo it’s costly and or rare
-if you keep track of weight they are heavier
-special ammo is more rare and or expensive compared to the bow/crossbow equivalents
I think the whole balancing issue is just it’s own problem, in fact if a player just wants a gun reflavor the bow/crossbow equivalent with the same dmg and make it un silent, if they want it to feel special make it enchanted or give it a story
Long and short of it, it’s a gun no need to overcomplicate it
I know in Pathfinder 2e, they're balanced weirdly but are still kind of neat. Essentially they're slightly stronger than bows and crossbows, but more expensive to maintain and require actions to reload BUT there are feats for Gunslingers to turn those reload actions into other actions (like attacking, defending or moving). A lot of the feats associtated with them beyond that are mostly for map control, like punishing enemies for moving at a distance. Makes them unique from archer fighters or rangers while not making them OP.
@@garrettlich7140 What about the fact that a musket can output over 10x the energy that a crossbow can and is known for punching through contemporary armor? Your proposal is lazy and pointless, why would I trade my element of surprise for maybe 2 points of maximum damage? What you have done is make firearms objectively terrible to use compared to a crossbow, both for adventurers and soldiers.
@@jonathanwells223 laughs in fireball,
But in all seriousness the games machanics are just that machanics, if you or another player want the rp of having a firearm and the dm wants things to be as balanced mechanically as possible and or low effort then simply reflavor, if you want guns to be more powerful you can do that by upping dmg and or range at the cost of accessibility to ammo/guns or force reloading as an action
Thier are many ways both stated and not stated to make firearms fun/balanced in pathfinder and dnd, it boils down to what you and the dm plus party want
Edit: I forgot to address you first point, yes a musket ball has more force but dose that really mean anything when going up against an ancient dragon when the monk is using magic mantis style kungfu? My point is that you should have some lvl of both balance and suspension of disbelief, your musket ball can hit a troll thru the skull and not kill it while next turn the rouges dart hits the head and finishes the job because of dice rolls and it’s hp
To sum up my whole thing, it’s a game do what ya want with guns in it
you could just not play DnD and play another tabletop roleplaying game?
I remember a phrase from Shadow and Bone, it boiled down to "When we had sabers, a mage valued 100 of us, now with our rifles, i think we're pretty equal" what's a bullet if not a very small but much faster fireball?
the thing is, if they have bullets (exploited chemistry and physics) the probs have equally advanced and exploited magic. you could imagine a mage being equipped things like advance wands with triggers and rifled barrels, a gun but with all the adaptability of magic and the need to not carry ammo.
A bullet is more comparable to a Magic Stone, really.
@@mryellow6918 Most settings, a magic doesn't work enough like a gun to simply reapply all those firearm technologies to them with no changes. Magic generally requires an "effort of will" or infusion of energy, so mages only cast them when they want to rather than inadvertently firing them off all the time. If spells miss at all, it's not as often as you'd think given the subpar ergonomics of a wand or staff. Even if you could use the extra accuracy rifling provides, it's only effective on projectiles with mass, and simple grooves will only effectively stabilize solid projectiles.
Rather than some superior battle wand, you effectively have a regular gun you load with magic instead of conventional ammo and a regular wand fastened together. And you probably don't _want_ your wand shackled to a more cumbersome firearm.
That's really the issue.
@@justinthompson6364 If they use wands at all...
Maybe they use guns and cast spells in between reload or something.
Also, something that oddly turned out to be rather overpowered in Dungeons and Dragons can be javelins. They have a rather long range, and always get strength bonuses to damage. In 3.5 Edition, I had a half-orc barbarian using javelins. With his high movement rate and ridiculous strength, he could run a very good distance and still throw a javelin very accurately, with a huge damage bonus. People were shocked at how much he outperformed dedicated archers with longbows.
Perfectly balanced as all things should be.
Javelins are generally balanced through their low weapon damage die, ammunition, weapon drawing and mechanical challenges.
I think they are in a great spot.
While most tables forego arrow tracking, i usually see javelins being limited to 4-6 uses before you have to retrieve them again.
A level 5 character in D&D 5e has two attacks per round, meaning that if they throw javelins they are out of ammo after 2-3 rounds.
Often that's enough, but it is a valid and relevant limitation.
Next you can only draw one weapon per turn in 5e, meaning you get maybe two attacks in turn 1 and one attack in turn 2. One D&D playtest changes that, but throwing weapon will still leave you without a weapon in your hand at the end of your turn, lowering the damage your opportunity attacks deal significantly. Barbarians are less impacted here because of their high damage bonuses to unarmed attacks.
And lastly you have to deal with limited range and cover. An archer will have the Archery Fighting Style and probably even Sharpshooter, negating all of these entirely. The Barbarian example doesn't get Archery.
Of course this is the reason why most Barbarians will take levels in Fighter after lvl 5 or 6 - they can get Thrown Weapon Fighting which increases their damage and also allows them to draw two javelins. Imo it's always the best pick for a Barbarian unless you can use Dueling. It's certainly better than Great Weapon Fighting.
---
Overall this means that while yes, javelins are strong, they aren't overpowered and still have significant weaknesses that require investment.
I'm actually playing a Hoplite style Barbarian starting Tuesday, and i will make great use of Javelins. Very excited for that, it's a cool and fun playstyle!
TBH in a single combat kinda situation with someone experienced with a javelin, that's sort of what I'd expect. You don't need to stop, draw the thing, aim, fire, you could probably chuck it on the move if you wanted to and still be semi-accurate.
Arrows are great when you've got a whole pile of them loosing at once so you can just point in the general direction of a group and probably hit something. Otherwise, there's a reason there's tournament to show off how accurate you can be with a bow, because it's really damn hard.
Javelins have been a thing for A LONG while in real life too for similar reasons. They are really underrepresented in most fantasy
I mean, yeah. You'd need to be a large-sized creature to be able to compete within the same short range. Clearly your archers refused to engage at their full range increment, or even the second.
I fondly remember a 5E campaign where my pirate character had a Repeating Shot pistol. For the uninformed, Repeating Shot is an artificer infusion that ignores loading and that pulling the trigger will magically create a bullet in the chamber.
DM balanced this by requiring me to always have black powder available for the gun to draw from. So another way to balance guns and bows/crossbows is having to add powder on top of having to carry ammunition.
I fondly remember that dream where 4th and 5th editions were never created,
Sadly I woke up.
@@JohnSmith-ty2he what's so bad about 4 and 5? played 5 only
Or just make other martials not completely worthless so guns don't feel all too out of place.
@@sundaw I skipped 4 entirely because it was basically D&D the action card game. TBH not super knowledgeable about it. It was just way out there weird compared to every other version of D&D.
As for 5th I could go on for hours but for sake of brevity I'll make a short list.
1) Advantage/disadvantage system replacing stacking bonuses generally negates good RP and character diversity in place of a "get advantage, apply disadvantage, win" scenario.
2) Constrained number range limits build diversity to an extent that frankly you could remove stats/skills entirely and not much would change. Generally you are looking at a range of 6-8 numbers on a d20 of difference between everyone in the party and every monster.
3) Limited number range ruining item diversity by constraining everything to such a narrow range there is little to no room for interesting items.
4) Removal of mechanically complex concepts like concealment percentages, partial/full cover, dropping prone to avoid projectiles, the grappling system, the 5 foot steps, a deep and varied feat system that didn't overlap with ability progression, skill ranks, removal of ability to maintain multiple overlapping spells, ect.
5) Changing the rest system in a way that pigeon holes DM's into spamming the party with a ton of small encounters due to short rest mechanics. This also means injuries are rarely scary, and death is hard to come by.
Ultimately the biggest issues can all be summed up as "simplified to the point where it feels like 3.5 for the masses." 5th edition is basically "D&D for Dummies." You can replace the entire system with the following and nothing much changes during a session.
Roll a D6. Fail on 1-3 Succeed on 4-6. With Disadvantage Fail on 4 as well. With Advantage Succeed on 3 as well.
With such a small range of numbers that's how 5th edition ultimately plays. None of your character choices really matter. It's the illusion of choice.
@@JohnSmith-ty2he I played a setting for the 3.5 called Iron Kingdoms- now it is a stand-alone D20 game- that has melee and firearm, it was a Steampunk setting and it was really fun because the guns were powerful but slow to recharge, and every cartridge was expensive as it was created by alchemy. Even today I have a sweet spot for that game.
I do not know why someone should be afraid of firepower, you just need a DM smart enough to balance things, and if your DM is not able to do so you can have problems even with the more basic precooked Faeroun's adventures.
One thing that often gets overlook in the fantasy/medieval genre are pellet bows. Basically the lovechild of a bow/crossbow and a sling.
I love stonebows. One of my favorite weapons from an aesthetic standpoint. Unfortunately, the delivered kinetic energy never really made them viable as a battlefield weapon, but they were very popular for small game hunting. It was a great way to take out rabbits, squirrels, birds, etc. without destroying the body with an arrow.
Okay, I'm looking that up.
Perfect for fur hunters, squirrels beware
Ammo way easier to find and carry
why would a medieval varmint rifle be of use to dragon slayers?
I would like to point out that in Gary Gygax's Chainmail (the precursor to D&D) arquebusiers (effectively a medieval soldier with a musket) were an actual unit type. The game also features rules for cannons!
plus they would latter be adapted in as well its just now its specialized units or artificers making them rather then just mass produced fire armes being cheaply aviable.
@@housewilma4904 Character idea: the issue with early firearm barrels was you had to keep a cool rod in place and smith molten metal around it. Perhaps there is a gnome or dwarf that "has a great idea for a new weapon" but he needs to track down an enchanted cold iron rod to make it.
@@kylejohnson423 plus cold iron musket balls would be the perfect anti mage weapon.
as both weapon and ammo would be magic resistant going straight threw magic shields.
plus if you run out of ammo you could still bash the spellcaster over the head with the buttstock doing the same damaga as a cold iron club.
Guns have also ALWAYS been part of dnd
also expedition to the barrier peaks has laser rifles
Always surprised with Skall’s skill and topnotch handling with firearms
You know what's funny? I looked up the origin of the phrase "top notch" and there's not much known about it. There are a few ideas, but few sound solid and no one really agrees on anything. The most plausible one was a suggestion that it came from an old game of some kind in which the top notch was the highest score. Funny how that happens in language.
@@Nihil0s I think it has something to do with the top notch? Or the top of the notch? What is a notch?? So many questions...
@@knighthunter1791 Exactly. The top notch on what, exactly? Why is it better than the others?
@@Nihil0s Because it's on top!
I was surprised by it
For one of my campaigns I created an artificer that used a gun capable of shooting different effects in addition to its normal gun so it had a shotgun like blast and a lighting bolt piercing round.
The gun itself was based off one I saw on Forgotten Weapons as a breech loading wheelock that used a metal canister that fit into a part of the breech to say how I reloaded it so fast despite it being a blackpowder weapon.
As for working it into the world I main said he was already an arcane engineer so the gun was one of his personal pet projects
Yo that's a solid idea. An Artificer who's a pirate and the tinkery implement they make to cast a spell is a row of flintlock pistols strapped across their chest like a pirate's gunbelt. Artificers are supposedly supposed to make something that is used to replicate the spell effects.
Shame I despise artificers because I cannot tolerate staggered spell level progression. Their casting needs to be full or like the warlock.
Great minds think alike.
Isn’t that mostly Percy’s weapon from critical role?
@@asitallfallsdown5914 Nah I don't mind spell progression like that to me its meant to be a hybrid spell class like Eldritch Knight. And to be fair the character was originally based off the UA playtest Artificer class but I have since updated him to the new Artillerist one.
My backstory for his character was that he was the son of a siege engineer and travelled with his father in a mercenary army (look up condottieros from Italy circa 1300s) where he learned engineering from his father and magic from the army's spell casters and his invention of gunpowder
Pretty sure the gun you're talking about was the leMat revolver which had the cylinder revolve around a chamber for a 410 shotgun shell. Very cool design
A really big potential downside to guns is how incredibly loud they are.
Might not matter in some situations, but in others you just alerted every enemy within a few kilometers of you...
If you shoot a crossbow at a dragon and miss, the dragon might not notice. If you shoot a rifle at a dragon and miss, the dragon will certainly hear the shot and probably see the smoke (depending on the kind of gun I guess...) Though the sound of the gun could also scare away weaker enemies. A very situational mechanic with lots of possibilities.
If you stab a guy in a city the town's people might not find the body for a week... If you start shooting a gun in a city you instantly have the soldiers or town's guard after you.
Not to mention using a gun in a Close quarters area. The sound alone would be enough to deafen smaller enemies, stunning them and removing hearing, while larger enemies/bosses would be stunned for a turn. Meanwhile, the same thing would happen to your allies if they don’t have hearing protection on. (Bringing a whole new set of trade offs)
Played in a D&D campaign that allowed gunslingers. One of my best friends played as a rootin' tootin' cowboy shootin' Elven bounty hunter. He was by far the scariest member of the party when it came to damage, and he earned the unofficial moniker of Mage-Slayer with how quickly he could put down spellcasters. Guns in fantasy RPGs can be quite scary.
I mean, yes its his job. Depending how its implemented an optimized handcrossbow, crossbow expert, sharp shooter fighter will be able to dish out the same amount of dmg, so from what I have seen its not overpowered.
Your DMs mages suck then ... It not like they literally can become invulnerable to projectile weaponry through dozen or so different methods ...
@@Asghaad 5e has *a couple,* and I don't think any of them are wizard spells.
I'd throw a mage at him that specifically targets him: have him get targeted with a spell where he either saves (dodges) or all his powder cooks off, ruining his ammo and cleaving his health in half.
Let the enemy learn counterplay too!
@@JohnQDarksoul then maybe 5e is just garbage ... taking defensive spells from mages is like taking extra attacks from warriors or stealth from rogues ...
3 and 3.5 - at lower levels you can either use illusion spells or plethora of barriers , at higher levels you can literally become immune to non magical or magical weapons or become unaffectable by any physical means ...
In some settings to balance firearms against other ranged weapons is their loudness, if one of your heroes fires a gun not only will it attract attention from regular enemies, it could also hurt their teammates ears if they’re too close. Also regular people might become curious who is able to afford a gun if they hear shooting, so it could attract possible thieves
Was checking to see if anyone had already made this comment. That's what almost always stops me from playing a gunslinger in most games, fantasy or not.
And cost. Let's not pretend crossbows were cheap and guns even more so.
Also utility. Incindiery rounds are tough to make. A flame arrow not so much.
5:00 It should be noted that the original idea of Hit Points in D&D wasn't strictly health, but your ability to defend yourself from lethal attacks.
As HP depleted what was really depleted was your ability to fend off and reduce mighty axe hits like that to grazing wounds. Losing 18 hp might mean you blocked with your sword, but your arm's gone numb. So then when you go down to 0 hp, it's not that you ran out of blood or health, but that now because your arm went numb your defenses were overwhelmed and you finally let a real blow through
You can balance out the power in a magical world. Guns have more range and speed but magic is more destructive. You can replenish mana but if you're out of bullets, you're done.
Humans are enhanced and basically superhuman, they have enchanted armor and weapons, etc.
Edit: There's also a point how bows and crossbows can be more potent with magic and supernatural humans. It won't be as obsolete as it did irl.
If you're out of bullets and have a caster especially arcane or even better an artificer you'd be ok, they can help make or convert materials into what will work.
i think guns in a fantasy world would be a great weapon for mages themselves (especially if normal spells need incantations). Just replace the gunpowder with a rolled up fire scroll (or something similar) and the bullet with a magic stone shard (that can possibly be enchanted as well) and the mage has an easy to make quasi infinite amount of light weight ammunition that can potentially be used to deliver remote spells in an instant.
You cod create more ammo using magic for a limited times and when you have mana
Problem is, as i stated avove: A lvl 1 wizzard can cast 2 spells a day. A lvl 1 gunslinger can shoot more hundreds of bullets aday... So yes, if you allow infinite spellslots, THEN guns make perfect sence...
Also, don't forget the sound: the gunner would require hearing protection (which would incur penalty to perception checks) or suffer deafness condition for a round or two. Also, the sound would always alert pretty much anything in a kilometer radius. Also, imagine firing these things in dark caves, where your other party members are all using dark-vision. DM would be like "Okay, you're all blinded AND deafened for three rounds."
Did an early 1900’s themed game a few months ago. The player with the shotgun forgot what happens when you fire a 12-gauge indoors and the whole party was deafened for a few rounds.
I mean if you start doing that, then you'd have to start doing the same with magic as well. Fireball would become even more of a hindrance to the party since an explosion of that size is also, very loud and very blinding.
@@insertname3977 a fireball isn't exploding on your party if a party member is casting it. So no the sound and light would be away from the group. Adding sound and blinding to a fireball would only make it stronger when hitting enemies.
@@TriariusMetzer Except it's most certainly being used on party members by their own teammates as people don't give a shit who it hits for the most part so long as it hits the enemy, and unless you're miles away from the fireball, you'd still be close enough for the explosion to deafen and blind you.
@@TriariusMetzer The actual description of the spell "A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame." If it's loud enough to hear from over 100 feet away, it most be extremely loud. Being low and bassy probably makes the vibration worse.
aparently in ww1 tehre was a lot more than sabers, people were making improvised melee weapons to fight in the trenches
like morning stars and flails and lets not forget the legendary tench shovels
The Mighty Trench Shovel created a lot of real life Barbarian Fighters in those trenches.
WW1 had a lot of melee weapons for those trenches, as purpose built and manufactured as the triangle bladed dagger with the knuckle-duster guard, all the way to big stick with pointy metal on the end of it. WW1 is honestly the most horrific of the world wars and pretty much set up WW2 but gets covered very little (at least here in America) due to the large and dark shadow of its younger sibling
While that is true, a big part of that was because the standard issue military rifles were not built with the extremely tight quarters of trench warfare in mind, and, other than officers or special duty troops generally, didn't have pistols. The rifles of the time had been designed with the idea of long-range engagements, with rifles often having a zero of 200-300 meters and reaching out to 2000 meters or more. To do so meant the rifle had to have power and length, both of which are a hindrance in the tight confines of trench warfare. If the majority of troops had been issued for example pistol caliber lever action carbines, the prevalence of those improvised melee weapons would have been greatly reduced, possibly to the point of practical nonexistence.
@@zacharyharwell351, also if you look at casualty counts, many more people died in the American civil war and in WW2 compared to the First World War
@@NicoPPSh True, but the density of casualties per the land that held said losses is no comparison; not to mention flamethrowers, chemical warfare, long-range artillery bombardment, etc. all made it much worse than the mere losses accrued
Either way though, they all sucked
I played in low magic western setting, and our combat always ended in melee: 2 shots from shotgun, 6 shots from revolver and then rush in with sabre. Turn is 6 seconds. Reloading takes 1 turn for Shotgun and 3 for revolver, switching weapons is free (if you drop your current). In high stakes fight, you just cannot waste turns loading.
All those poor guns getting dropped
New York reload: just carry like a bandolier full of revolvers.
@@bvoyelr remember that your loaded revolver weight as much as a longsword, cost a lot more money each, and that gun shots cost more than arrow. Might be worth too have two revolver for hard encounters, but most of the time just go with a sword, they are already weakened once you unloaded even one gun.
I like how while you can exhaust your gun of ammo you can't phisically exhaust yourself and just keep swinging and firing off 2 arrows a second is perfectly easy and doable forever, i hate fantasy settings, like either be connected to reality, or be the most cool far off shit ever
Enemy gets one or two loads of buckshot/a handful of revolver bullets, closes distance to hack at gunman in 6 seconds.
Personally, I think the fact that bows and crossbows are silent and can shoot over obstacles is enough in terms of balancing for adventurers. Not to mention that if there is magic in the world, you can always have a bunch of trick arrows or bolts that are more versatile than magic bullets, if you allow those at all.
And who's to say that you can't do the same with bullets? And bullets are much MUCH faster than arrows and bolts. Good luck dodging bullets flying at mach Jesus.
@@edgardox.feliciano3127 its a bloody board game if someone has a high enough ac they can dodge anything
If you can enchant a arrow you can make a pistol shoot exploding fireballs
@@ultimaterecoil1136 don’t even need magic, real life explosive ammos a thing
But magic is nuts if left unchecked, catapult can turn a pebble into a bullet, make said pebble a molten coal or a poison needle, have a bag of pebbles and your firing squirrel shot for dirt cheap
Dm lenience and creative use of gear/abilities is insane and one of the best ways to have fun
@@garrettlich7140 yeah but magic would be more flexible. You don’t have to switch out to your explosive rounds switching to explosive ammo and potentially have the hassle of organizing different ammo types. You decide this situation calls for a bit more boom so you make your next shot have more boom. Plus more a focus on enchanting weapons with extra oomph would mean you wouldn’t be entirely defenseless in situations where magic is disabled. You can still shoot a gun in an antimagic field. You just can’t suddenly shoot an turn a standard round into a explosive or incendiary one on a whim.
In the last Savage Worlda game I ran, I let the players use "wands and staves" with crystals that needed to be swapped out after being used. These were, of course, guns. By the end of the campaign, one of them had created a "Squad Automatic Wand."
that probably sounds fun
Designated Marksman Stave.
You can also limit by price and availability. I'm not going to let a charter start with a +4 Flaming Great Axe, but I don't mind if they get one later. Have the character start with a crossbow and eventually get a rifle. It'll still have all the drawbacks that you discussed in the video, but it also have some major advantages, and that's okay because it's a reward for making it later in the game, same as an enchanted sword or a big spell for the wizard. They are necessarily better than lower class gear and I don't think that's necessarily a problem.
My DM does that on our homebrew D&D 3.5e campaign. Guns came at around the mid levels as an upgrade to the crossbows, when everybody was geared up enough to take that degree of damage. Dealing I think 3d12 damage at first, with higher level versions now reaching up to 5d12 damage plus any bonus from enchanted ammos. No bonus from ability score, weapon jams until next turn on a nat 1. Deals really solid damage. Meanwhile my guy with a sword is hitting for 1d10+34, plus enchantments. It's lower, but way more consistent. And the enemies can just tank that, so both are equally absurd from a realism standpoint. And totally awesome from a "rule of cool" standpoint.
@@SaganTheKhajiit I play 3.5 exclusively, at least for D&D. Rule of cool tends to be way more fun for the players (but know your play group!).
@@pokemon1895 Most of this group is together for three years now, with only one of the members being near a year with us. We put rule of cool and roleplay above everything else (kinda tough during seduction checks, though).
Cleaning should definitely be part of things. Black powder is very foul, someone could be the most skilled shot in the continent but give their gun a chance to misfire or even explode if they clearly aren't making a point to maintain it.
Yes, crossbows definitely have some hefty draw-backs :D
I like how they did blackpowder weapons in Warhammer. Or Mordheim, which I played. They are powerful. But take a long time to reload, so it takes an entire turn to reload. And they can misfire, or explode if you are very unlucky.
Introducing renaissance weapons is relatively easy. Handguns and modern light artillery are important parts of armies and it's still a weird not-fully-modern world. Same with other stuff, cash and nation-states, ships and other bits.
Firearms in WFRP aren't all that powerful compared to a crossbow. Some of my friends used a house rule where they rolled damage with advantage. Roll two dice and take the highest. Sometimes they rule that firearms mitigate one point of armour (a bloke in mail and plate has two armour) But in the basic rules, both bows/crossbows and pistols/handguns deal 1d6+3 or +4 damage. Firearms are more expensive tools and require ball and powder. GW being GW, they went about making special rules on top of the special rules for misfire and range bands which bows lacked.
An entire turn is fast a fuck! That's only roughly six seconds!
I love how Battlefield 1 "balanced" crossbows by turning it into a grenade launcher. It was actually used in WW1 as the Sauterelle, but got quickly replaced by trench mortars.
Me and my DM came up with an idea for flintlock pistols: Slightly less accurate than a bow/crossbow, does a ton of damage if it hits, but take a full turn to reload, during which you can't do any other actions during that turn.
still feels over nerfed to me. In a game where you can be eldritch blasted into dust there is no reason to limit firearms XD You dont make the sorcerer reload their spells? They can cast them as long as they have spell slots. Why should the firearm have to lose a turn? Obviously scale the different guns like you would any other weapon. You have a broadsword with magic blah blah blah and The gunslinger has a rifle with a 6 round magazine. Guns literally cannot overpower a system WITH MAGIC IN IT XD. I mean maybe if everything was concentration or chant spells but when you can just sith lightning or eldritch blast shit into dust with the wave of your hands XD firearms arent really on that level XD Unless im raining down artillery from half a town away XD
@@WorldWearyAngel it depends on what their dm they have, and what game they are playing
First off if they are going off of using 1 major move and 1 minor move, the major is them usually attacking with their weapon or using an ability and attacking, healing or casting a spell etc etc
There is also the roll for accuracy (for the attacker) and roll too dodge, (for the defender) roll for accuracy determines how accurate your shot is, if you roll high you have a good chance too hit someone but if its the opposite, you gonna miss entirely (this is the same for every type of attack)
For the minor move, you could make the rule to reload your gun, just like how an archer would reload their weapon or a crossbow men and at certain times mages aswell (yes mages need too reload, they use mana too cast magic which they can run out of the thing is they are done for if they run out of mana during combat qs thw only way to reload mana then would be via potion). The point im making is you sacrifice a minor move for not being the target, being the target of regular swordsmen that is, because even if you have a loaded gun, like in this video, would it do damage to some swordsman in full plate armour and if it does, how many rounds? Would it be enough too save you from being stabbed by regular swordsmen? Thats why archers who didnt wear much armour were typically at the back of the army firing volleys of arrows or a bunch of mages using spells, granted that magic seems too be very very powerful imagine the concentration and dedication too casting those spells, or the mana costs to do that, much like the blunderbuss flintlock op is saying, their most powerful move could be a one time use
And lastly abilites, abilites would be a vald argument to pick apart in favour of buffing guns as there is only so many abilites you could doo for a gun, but at the same token, the same could be said for crossbows and bows. Now not encluding enchantments as thats too easy and litterally everything could work for that, guns, in theory would have more freedom too make more unique abilites but under the condition of how modern these firearms are, per say you could use a blunderbuss and that would be like close too mid range weapon, you could have irs normal regular attack, you could assassins creed it and just use 3 more guns and drop them once fired or put an exposive inside of it like it was a mini grenade launcher
But what about six shot revolvers, well you could fire normally, or pan handle the end of it too fire all 6 shota in a quick burst, scatter fire (mainly just a double attack, close too what a power attack would be) or equip your bullets with what ever you perfer, incenadary, explosive, poison, rage etc etc
But then again it comes down too a couple of things, how your dms plays and what TTRPG your playing
@@WorldWearyAngel Really guns can't overpower a system with magic in it? Really? Do you want to continue make idiotic vague statements? A M60 Machine gun can have a 200 rnd belt. Does far more damage than an arrow let's just say a d12 being very generous. And can fire 650 rnds in a minute. Given a players turn is 6 seconds this is essentially 65 rounds in 6 seconds. That would be 65 d12. Tell me a spell that does that.
On top of taking a full action to reload a flint lock pistol that is about realistic and balanced. It should technically be more.
Instead of taking a whole turn to reload, just give it a loading restriction
A flintlock is going to be 3 shots a minute. That's the length of an entire combat. And probably an entire turn to reload. You also have to concentrate while reloading, probably for an entire turn, which could be interrupted.
You can also New York reload, which would roll just like drawing a weapon in combat.
Bullets would penetrate your shield or your armor and do massive damage to any humanoid.
I love that he mentioned a 45-70 in this video because that's what I was picturing as an overpowered fantasy weapon
I am allowing flintlocks and black powder bombs in my campaign. There's a section in the Dungeon Master's guide about them. Muskets do 1d12 + Dex mod, have a range of 80/120 feet.
PS There is also the Gunner feat which gives proficiency in firearms, no close range penalty for ranged weapons, can fire more than once per, and +1 to dexterity
Do firearms get to penetrate armor better than crossbows? I mean they do output over 10x the energy, it's only fair.
@@jonathanwells223 No, the armor class system in 5e doesn't work like that. They do deal higher damage compared to a crossbow but have shorter range; it's Pike and shot era range. Both a pistol and a heavy crossbow deal 1d10 damage while a musket does 1d12 damage. Upside, a combat round is 6 seconds and it only takes a bonus action to load them. My headcanon is Gnomes developed breech loaded paper cartridge flintlocks sooner.
Guns do exist in the Forgotten Realms. The Waterdeep Dragonheist adventure module has Drow Gunslingers. One of my players befriended the Drow Street gang so they could get a gun.
Oh good, give guns to the elves, that makes a ton of sense! Goddammit I hate 5e with all my being!
@@jonathanwells223 And?
Good points for RPGs. Though I'm not much for firearms, I've always appreciated your sense of gun safety in your videos (keeping your finger off the trigger when showing a gun and such). Good insights in incorporating guns into a fantasy setting, and still keeping "safety first" with guns. Keep up the great videos.
Guns and beer!
@@michaelgarrow3239 And now, I want to see an army of gun-wielding dwarves.
The crossbow in 5E is basically a gun. Even with no feats you get 1 shot per turn, meaning you can shoot it as fast as a low level character can swing a sword. Shields and armor don't stop it because all you have to do is roll higher than the enemy's AC. Since the encounters have to be represented by a board laid out on a table, you can usually shoot all the way across the battlefield.
I may be mistaken, but crossbows have the loading trait, so you need to use an action to load it, that's 1 shot every 2 turns if you don't have the crossbow expert feat or a special crossbow
@@luigiff3431 if you're using a crossbow, you're gonna have the crossbow expert feat
@@luigiff3431 It reloads between turns without the feat. All it says is that you can only shoot it once per attack action regardless of the number of attacks you have. It doesn't say you have to take an action to load it.
@@cjams115 That logic only applies if you're playing munchkiny character-focused 3.x to 5E. If you're playing older editions, OSR, house-ruled 5E, or simply some non-D&D ruleset entirely the relevant options may not even exist... but crossbows probably will still be in the game, the relative distances using minis at the table will be similar, the c-bows still have some kind of loading restriction because that's part of the fiction around crossbows.
@@noahhutchinson915 5e is not a great system
In my experience there are 3 categories of implementation for early firearms:
1: Pathfinder method, where they scale terribly and exist as a way for excited new players to blow their characters' hands off whilst paying more than they'd pay for a magical crossbow (which is also terrible compared to anything other than guns) that can shoot faster and more reliably, running ammo that's more varied and a fraction of the cost of their bullet counterpart.
2: Lamentations of the flame princess method, where they're pretty much one use per encounter and will howitzer something flat. (This is usually in games with a lot of fragile combatants, so it becomes a game of appraising who's worth the shot.)
3: DnD method: Reskinned crossbows/wands but with less ammo variety and far higher expense.
Edit: Props to Skal, after watching the whole episode he really hit the key points on this one.
The problem for Critical Role is that they’re anti-gun. You’ve got Percy saying firearms are far too dangerous to exist and everyone agrees… in a world full of monsters that are constantly laying waste to villages and people can literally summon a storm of meteors…
Though it would take most wizards countless years of studying and refining their powers to do stuff like Meteor Swarm or other 9th level spells. In comparison, it’s a lot easier for some peasant to pick up a flintlock, get trained with it, and shoot down people who have had to spend longer on mastering conventional warfare. Hence, Percy was afraid of the potential that mass-produced weapons could unleash on the world.
@@zombieshark803 kind of like how anyone can shake hands with a greater being and have access to eldritch blast? A cantrip which is pretty easily more powerful and versatile than a flintlock. Mind you, a heavy crossbow easily packs a higher punch than a flintlock or even a musket too.
@@brush5004 this. People who don't allow guns are coping.
The reason firearms are dangerous is because anybody can use them at very near the maximum capability of the weapon. It's not an issue of power, it's an issue of ease of use. Normal people, even in the world Critical Role plays in, can't use magic, and aren't skilled enough to survive in combat with monsters. Guns fundamentally change the level of lethality across the board.
It's not an anti-gun stance. It's a practical worldbuilding stance. The existence of guns would allow a literal baby to kill a party of fledgling heroes, all superhuman in their own right, on accident.
while it's true guns are mediocre at very high levels where people are supermen, but at low level they decimate everything. peasant with a gun could slaughter a low level party.
edit: actually if bows and crossbows can get better with supernatural materials/enchantments, why not guns? plus a wizard could enhance the explosion in the gun making it even better as long as the materials can withstand it.
For those who might think a modern metallic centerfire cartridge is a bit of a stretch for their fantasy game I might suggest some of the very early breech loading rifles that used paper cartridges.
A good example is the Dreyse Needle Rifle which was the first bolt action breech loader and used a needle like firing pin to stab through a self contained paper cartridge and strike a percussion cap embedded inside.
More of, take a look at far older discovered or preserved guns. Forgotten weapons has a video on a 15th century wheellock musket that uses metallic cartridges as well as a separate video on repeating guns that predate the industrial revolution
Oh I know about a lot of those very very early repeating arms. I was just providing an easy alternative to some of the firearms that Skal was presenting. Kinda in between the muzzle loader and the trapdoor Springfield he had.
Also as a DM I would hate trying to figure out how to stat block something like a Chambers gun or something of the sort.
Early self-contained metallic cartridges were made from rolled brass foil or sheet that was soldered to a primed brass base. Pretty achievable for some skilled medieval craftsmen.
Primed paper cartridges might actually be a bit more difficult, as they demanded quality paper of consistent thickness to make.
Chassepot was far better.
@@Bidimus1 It was developed 25 years after the Dreyse of course it would be better. But that wasn't the point anyways.
Great topic well handled
And Percy's pepperbox being nerfed isn't to depower the gun it's so they can introduce power creep as he tweaks his design and improves slowly over the story
Plus, you know... the fact it was cursed as hell
@@fanusobscurus I meant going forward from the season finale but yes lol
@@fanusobscurus funny you should mention hell. The List was inhabited by a demon from The Abyss, but spoilers follow
Later in game Vox Machina travels to the nine hell's at which point Percy writes up a contract with a devil, because he figures his soul is already damned so he doesn't want any of his friends to do so.
As I recall, Percy's pepperbox only broke on a Natural 1 (which is a Critical Fail); and was described as misfiring sometimes when his dice rolls meant he would have missed the target anyway. I could (probably am) wrong on this; a quick search didn't confirm or deny my recollection. It's been a while. (**everyone in the background** It's been a whiiiiile)
I had written this whole thing about DnD rules, but erased it instead of starting an argument. In the end, the rules are guidelines, the point of DnD is to have fun, and if you're not having fun, you're in the wrong group. Well, likely in the wrong group.
Communication is key to a good DnD experience; so check in as a group. Find out what everyone's looking to get out of the game, and discuss things as a group. Maybe the ranger learns to use a rifle; now they have to worry about magical ammo because late game, a lot of creatures have resistance to non-magical piercing/bludgeoning/slashing damages. Low rolls could mean the gun jammed or a cartridge misfired instead of describing it as a miss, which is also fine, bullets whizzing by your head, or that odd angle that meant it ricochet off a piece of plate armor, it's all fine.
Most firearms on D&D Beyond are pretty on-par with casters. Warlock's Eldritch Blast cantrip (unlimited casting of those!) does 1d10, plus bonuses from invocations, and fires multiple with more levels. Maybe they fire their eldritch blast through a long gun instead of a spell focus, or their hand.
From a decent range, you can use a bow or crossbow to stealthily snipe enemies. Can't do that with a lever action rifle that emits a bright flash and a loud POP with every shot. So maybe the gun breaks stealth every time, while archers and crossbowmen can roll stealth vs target's perception roll.
I don't want to say DnD might not be for some people, but people who think their fantasy game needs to be as real as possible rarely really enjoy DnD or Pathfinder; and there are other systems out there for those kinds of games. Dungeons & Dragons is not a blanket term for tabletop role playing game; it's a brand. Reach out, expand, communicate, and most importantly, find the right people to play with.
Thank you for your time, and good night! o/
It wasn't on a natural 1. Each weapon had a different threshold. Like rolling under a natural 6.
The misfire rule for the guns came from pathfinder 1e which has each gun get a misfire value (typically a natural 1 or 2) to represent early firearms jamming, breaking, or otherwise not working when shot. The misfire value can change depending on the type of ammunition, class abilities, or even magical enchantments used. For example, a PF1e Pepperbox has a default misfire of a natural 1 to 2 but using paper ammunition increases it to 1 to 3.
I like to run my games as realistic as possible and let the magic be the exceptions. But I also rarely go past level 10 or so super high level games just feel like fantasy painted super heroes
@@goreobsessed2308 That's because they are, the higher the level the closer to superman and mythic legends people approach.
Percy’s guns as described in the Gunslinger subclass breaks depending on their misfire score and increased if he used grit points.
Yep, pretty much. For some reason, players and GMs remember that being shot kills people, but forget that being skewered with a heavy crossbow kills people, and you can't really dodge bolts at thirty feet any more than you can dodge bullets.
Yeah I don't get why people act like a gun would do 5x as much damage as a heavy crossbow bolt, and the game already has people dodging lightning. But suddenly a gun is some insurmountable weapon.
Just make it as realistic as possible, it takes way longer to reload a muzzleloader than it does a bow or crossbow unsheathing a sword or casting a spell. There's a reason they had bayonets to charge like a spear due to the long reload time. It all balances out.
The crossbow is actually quite close, if we're talking about the heavier ones (and a pre-made paper cartridge). Skall did some tests once.
You ever see someone reloading a historical crossbow? Even with the faster, lower draw weight ones it's still several seconds per shot. A heavy windlass bow is really slow. Fire rate for a muzzle loading musket and a crossbow is fairly similar. Bow is obviously considerably quicker, and swords can be drawn in moments, but comparing a muzzle loader to a crossbow is actually a pretty fair comparison for fire rate.
Yeah but to compensate you had 10 or 20 guys in ranks to keep up waves of fire every few seconds. Not exactly something that fits with a small squad of Murder Hobo- I mean Adventurers
@@LurchTheBastard I have an old school wood and steel crossbow, if you use a winch it isn't that slow. I also have a hand assembled muzzleloader kit that I shortened (easier and faster to ram the round) and have hand made paper cartridges and I hunt with it every year. If it was me with an unloaded crossbow vs. me with an unloaded muzzleloader the muzzleloader me would be dead, period. Most people have no idea how hard it is to prime a pan with just the right amount of powder when your adrenaline is rushing if it's a cap gun even better luck fumbling with that when you have the shakes. If it's raining considerably and you have to reload you had better have something else handy or you're definitely dead. People read too many fantasy books and don't realize what your body does with a weapon under stress and duress until it happens too them.
There are problems with 'realistic as possible" take - and quite few of them, actually. We have Pathfinder 1st edition as great example of poor firearms (and even crossbows) balance. First - most of the tabletop RPG's (if not all of them) are turn based. Even in okaishly optimized party combat can end in something like 2-3 rounds. Each round takes 6 seconds, so realistic as possible reload makes you standing for at least one whole turn and doing nothing (and thats what core rules says you to do). Not only it makes a lot of ranged options unviable but it just not fun at all. And second - you can by using some character feats and equipment make reload much faster (to the point there its nearly non existent), but if with crossbows this just put it in line with other ranged weapons, firearms by default ignore any armor. Sure, they dont do a lot of damage (still okay) but due to how armor in PF and DnD works you practically cannot miss.
Im sorry if this comment made your eyes bleed, english isnt my native language
That's one of the things I liked about the open 20 system that was used in D&D, D20 Modern, and Star Wars for a time. It really wasn't that hard to mix and match. GURPS was another system that had that ability. Traveler was set up so you could land your scout ship on a medieval world and have some fun. I've never been a purest when it came to fantasy gaming. That's why it's called fantasy gaming in the first place.
GURPS... i havemt heard that in a long time
@@thac0twenty377 I'm old 😃
@Douglas McNeil I hear that man. lol. remember Rolemaster fumble tables?
Hi Skall. Just a quick tip for the lever action usage - don't put all 3 fingers in the loop, leave your pinkie on the bottom out of the loop. That way you won't have to drive the action as much with turning the whole wrist and will be able to reload way faster - just snap it with a flick of the wrist, the lever will easily rotate around those two fingers. Try it in a dryfire practice and you will see it is much faster and way more comfortable and less tedious on your weapon hand :)
Have a great holiday season :)
That is so cool! You just taught me something too
I think there's quite a big advantage of crossbows vs early firearms: precision!
Exactly, Brother!
Irl a great number of newly trained shooters with cheap weapons was often better than a small number of eltie fighters with quality gear. This is the reason knigths and bowmen slowly got replaced by soldiers and arquebusiers.
Bow:
crafting speed ++
precision +
minimal strength requ. (8/10)
Crossbow:
crafting speed -
precision ++
minimal strength requ. (5/10)
Handgonne:
crafting speed ++
precision --
minimal strength requ. (1/10)
@@valentinmitterbauer4196 No its economics. Fielding an army of musketeers is cheaper than fielding an army of knight and bowmen.
Eeeeeeeh..... KIIIIIIIIINDA.
Like... At the end of the day a bunch of rifles in a line can still fire with much greater accuracy than a line of crossbows who still have to fire at an angle. Plus as distance goes on the rifle becomes better than a crossbow.
@@gunarsmiezis9321 Yea, that's what i wanted to say
In my fantasy world, there are places where people have medieval technology and places where people have sci-fi guns. I balanced them by making guns countable usually by a combination of techniques. For example some people can slightly shift the trajectory of the bullets, but order to not get hit they usually also have to be moving in the opposite direction. They basically have to block and dodge at the same time, which can be taken advantage of. Stuff like that makes it take an increased level of strategy to use guns effectively, at least in small scale combat
you could also easily think up a dune type shield for a battle mage where fast moving objects above a bow like a gun and cross bow have their projectile slown reducing their ap ( to a level where it wont pen your armour )or damage upon hitting the target.
@@mryellow6918 Very well said.
This does help me think of more ways to balance out firearms, and the lore behind them, in a setting a few friends and I are working on. It's basically gone from thinking of the setting as a medieval-ish fantasy to a something I call "Medieval Sci-fi."
I find that Pathfinder balanced guns very effectively. They had very high crit multipliers and hit on touch AC, but you couldn't apply your strength or dexterity to damage, and you either had to deal with how long they take to reload, or take a specific series of feats to reduce it to a swift action. They had clear downsides that prevented them from being a particularly common choice, while still being effective enough to make for interesting builds, such as gun magus, and even an entire class based around them, the gunslinger.
How does Pathfinder deal with the stealth / noise side of things for fire-arms? I mean ... no gun that can deliver a decent punch isn't very quiet ...
@@ThePhoenixpaw you can use magic to make the gun quiet, or you can go old fashioned and use a bayonet.
@@youmukonpaku3168 okay, sure enough. Some more magic to the gun, and it'll be smoke- and residueless too. Which mean an enchanted weapon ... and for the same amount of gold, with much cheaper ammunition, you could probably get a crossbow that's about as effective.
Still doesn't answer the question of what's the RAW (rules as written) concerning noise from guns in Pathfinder?
The touch AC thing was only within their first range increment which was typically either within charge range or very close to it. But the same book did include more modern firearms which did it within the first, I think, five range increments. The modern guns weren’t part of the assumed setting (outside if that one part of Reign of Winter) but a lot of people had a very knee jerk reaction and claimed guns were overpowered.
Another comment on the video mentioned how Pathfinder 2e did it which seems to have been a good midpoint. They have the same reload time as crossbows (so one action for most and a couple of particularly heavy ones needing two - you get three actions a turn, BTW) but lower base damage. But they all have the Fatal trait - when you land a crit, you change the the damage die to one two steps higher (so a flintlock pistol that normally does 1d4 damage has you reaching for your d8s instead), double the roll for the crit, and then roll *another* die of that size. So an arquebus on a normal hit does 1d8 damage but then if you land a crit with one you’re functionally doing 3d12 damage instead. *At level one.*
They also removed the need for a specific kind of proficiency and just rolled them into the base three weapon tiers (Simple, Martial, and Advanced) so anyone with blanket simple weapon proficiency (which is every class except for the wizard) can use the more basic firearms like the aforementioned flintlock pistol without any further investment.
@@ThePhoenixpaw When he said magic i thought more of a Silence spell
Loving it Skall, as a DM for the last 30 years iIhave never had any issues with introducing Firearms, as a matter of fact D&D wise rules for Firearms go back to 2nd Edition, hell one of the oldest adventures written by Mr. Gygax himself takes place on a crashed spaceship with lasers and energy swords
If I'm not mistaken (and I most likely am) wasn't the adventure with the spaceships, lasers and energy swords tied into the City of the Gods set in Greyhawk? or was it tied into the old Blackmoor setting?
@@mulberry_chrysanthemum670 yes it was an old greyhawk module called expedition to the barrier peaks, for level 7 parties....
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS VIDEO. I've always hated when a GM or player says something like "Ugh, why are you ruining my immersion? You are just trying to be overpowered." While they load up their THIRD FREAKING 8D6 FIREBALL or 5D6 SNEAK ATTACK DAMAGE PER ATTACK. No, my single action revolver that deals 1d8 piercing is overpowered.
Yeah because it's loud and looks cool! That's just completely OP.
I was looking for a comment like this lol. In a setting where a wizard can spit out fireballs and other destructive magic, is a revolver/rifle really that crazy? Especially if it's a setting where someone can learn or train to be a wizard or use magic without having to be born with some innate gift. At that point it's just becoming a rifleman but with extra steps.
@@IB-xk5se I mean even in 5e a wizard is suppose to be one with rather intensive training of years to be able to do what they do. Even the fighter and ranger at level 1 are suppose to have years of training and have more experience than the average melee and range combatant.
The OP argument also stems from the idea that you can theoretically train an army in a few weeks in the use of firearms and you now have a group of people on par with said fighters and rangers in terms of effectiveness, with just enough killing power that now you don't have to rely on wizards for hitting things hard.
Though this is dependent on what state firearms are in, since a medieval firearm is going to function very differently to say an AR-15.
I would not call it overpowered, but a lot of people want these things to be like a one hit kill against the dragon
Isn't a gun just a reskinned crossbow? Better ammo count and damage but longer reload, but it costs far more to make and get ammo (like anyone counts ammo)
One way I've worked around this is with fire magic. The ability to expand sources of fire and increase the size of explosions. So guns can be really effective as long as a fire mage isn't present. Because if one is, that weapon in your hand becomes a bomb as soon as you pull the trigger.
not to mention all the gunpower you'd be carrying on you.
Thanks for helping drill this idea into peoples' heads. I use up to early Renaissance guns in my D&D homebrew (up to matchlock but I might try wheellock too), they're not OP due to cost and reload times and I make them not work in rain. And top tier plate armor can potentially soak a fair amount of the damage from most of them, though I've added the "Heavy Arquebus" as well. Often times, players will fire a shot and then switch to melee due to the reload times.
Nice. I allow my players to go all the way in my own homebrews. I figure do what you want just be warned that actions have consequences. Several years ago I had a guy that wanted to be Halo's Master Chief in a world where the most advanced weapon was a flintlock. I said no problem. He used his big pretty assault rifle in two battles and ran out of ammo that couldn't be replaced. His other achievements include being the only character to get killed before endgame (twice) and accidentally shooting his girlfriend's character. Good times.
Wheel lock will work in rain pretty well. Flint lock would replace match lock fairly quickly as well. The primary need is a good spring which the match locks did not need.
And if you have a Japan equivalent in your world, you should give them Tanegashima, which, among *other* improvements, had a lacquer box fitted over the firing mechanism to *protect* it from moisture, and thus allow it to fire even *in* the rain or mist or fog.
Oh, and by the way, there was a member of the Tanegashima family called *Samurai-Zutsu* ; firearms made specifically *for* Samurai to wield, and their *very* different sense of honor from ours made them consider it dishonorable to *not* use Tanegashima. Just wanted to take the opportunity to *debunk* that myth.
That was the norm until the 18th century.
Pirate style. Gun in one hand sword in the other.
This is why the german blunderbuss axe was so effective in the medieval period, with how much info was mentioned in the video, I am shocked that it wasn’t mentioned along side with the bayonets
I am a gun nerd, I love your knowledge of firearms terminology
Skall used to do gun vids. He also owns firearms of his own. :D
This is a really interesting discussion, and particularly something I love about urban fantasy. A lot of the superhuman nature of people like the barbarian who can shrug off a great axe is trimmed away and the gun is really the equalizer. Being that superhumanly durable, or weilding magical powers, these are the domain of things which are in general not human and greater than. Guns are how we mere mortals have a fighting chance.
Such setting also tend to play even harder into the vulnerability trope, like if you want to kill a faerie, of course you need cold iron. Or silver for a werewolf, etc. Leveraging technology and ingenuity to defeat fowles who are far stronger, tougher, deadlier in every conceivable way but are beastial, or ancient and inflexible. Creatures who cannot adapt as humans have.
Something to remember with muzzle loaders is the "Mad Minute"- an old show of skill where soldiers would try to load and fire as many rounds as possible within one minute, and it was considered skillful to get off three rounds in that one minute. So if you want to implement something like that, perhaps have it where reloading is broken into sections- perhaps loading the barrel and priming the powder, with each as a bonus action if not moving or an action if moving, that cannot be completed on the same turn. This would replicate the mad minute, allowing a little over three rounds per minute of combat (each round in D&D lasts 6 seconds, so nine rounds for three shots from empty). You would have to make the damage large to compensate, but it would also encourage carrying multiple guns like in real life for higher rate of fire.
Would like to add the range & damage starting out could be limited by rifling a barrel being extremely expensive as no one wants to get hit with a class A misdemeanor because of one vicious tyrannical guild. Reality and world building.
Reloading?
Just wire some rusty scissors to your gun and start stabbing once the shooting is over!
@@MrYago-xd7um Unnecessary, because reloading a rifled musket is slower than reloading a smoothbore - it takes more time to ram the ball in. That was why armies often didn't use rifled muskets even when the tech existed for a long time. Rifles were, at one time, associated with sharpshooters and hunters.
The mad minute actually dates to the breech loading era and later. There was no mad minute drill for muzzle loaders, it was just called firing drill.
In AD&D 2e, ranged weapons get different rates of fire. By comparison, most people make one sword or spear swing per turn. Weapon proficiencies gave you additional attacks at higher level for both missile and close weapons (or removed extra reload turns).
A bloke with a bow can get off two shots per turn, same if a git tosses knives at you. Darts are the fastest weapons around, a dude can toss out three darts each turn and together they hurt more than people think. A light crossbow could fire once a turn, heavier crossbows could need one or two turns just reloading.
I can't remember what an arquebus had, but there was rules for using them and high-tech weapons.
*Thank you so much for spreading this lesson to people, Skallagrim!* This is mainly the reason why the Gunslinger is my favorite class in Pathfinder 2E. No other class for me, I'm a Gunslinger guy, through and through!
i use the rules for blackpowder weapons in Grim Hollow.
Basically they make noise and can be heard up to 300ft away like the spell Thunderwave.
and they don't work if wet, then they need to dry.
damage wise the ones we got in the rules are not op.
The book, "The Cry of the Icemark" by Stuart Hill is an excellent example of using period correct guns on the battlefield in a fantasy setting
"This is the greatest handgun ever made. The colt single action army. Six bullets, more than enough to kill anything that moves"
“The feeding ramp is polished to a mirror sheen. The slide’s been reinforced. And the interlock with the frame is tightened for added precision. The sight system is original, too. The thumb safety is extended to make it easier on the finger. A long-type trigger with non-slip grooves. A ring hammer… The base of the trigger guard’s been filed down for a higher grip. And not only that, nearly every part of this gun has been expertly crafted and customized.”
It's all fun and games till you have to fight 7 people.
Well no, plenty of animals that will shrug it off. In fantasy setting Many many more..
“You’re pretty good”
"Revolver ocelot "would be proud
One gun in that world, non intimidating.
But an army of guns, now it's world changing
In OSR games, one level 0 peasant with a Garand can mess up a hero pretty well. But so can a desperate store clerk with an axe. Don't pick senseless fights is the lesson.
A name level figter in old D&D would get an army. You got to recruit units with hundreds of level 0 men-at-arms. 50 men-at-arms with crossbows can be a fair threat to a lot of stuff.
As a level 10 wizard, you got to sit back in a chair and enjoy that you were a level 10 wizard-
I think you make some great points skall.
I never really thought about it much.
I always figured it was setting and balance wise.
Range and rate of fire mostly along with ease of use being most important. Especially when it comes the other ranged weapons.
But like you said, you can fix this with balancing and limiting the type of firearm.
Like just making them single shot or gunpowder that takes ages to load.
Modern repeating ones, even semi-auto or the repeating rifle you used are probably not gonna work without some serious damage nerfs.
I'm starting to introduce firearms into my DnD campaign, I realized I can balance them easily enough by limiting the availability of the weapons and consumables, and if my players are interested I can make a whole adventure just for them to acquire them, if things get out of hand I can easily get the gods involved and that's just more adventure!
I was just thinking What if you made a pistol effective range like 15 feet but gets no disadvange on melee, but a rifle just be the same as bow.
i think thats the proper way to limit their power. ita logic to.assume that they are rare and expensive, also cery limited and difficult to acquire. But a proficient player with a decent firearm should be powerful in dnd.
And firearms are all well and good until someone's got some fancy armour.
What about cover in combat? This gives melee a strat to fight both ranged users (bows, crossbows, but also magic-users), via hiding behind cover in the area that either raises their armor class or has a durability/hp amount an absorbs some/all of the damage of attacks directed towards someone behind that cover. I always try to not look at how to downplay or reduce someone in my games, but look at how logically in a setting the area would change, and looking at how gunfights are irl it goes around taking cover, and so developing a system around that concept leads to believability.
@@elricengquist9989 excelente observation I will have to think on that
In my fantasy setting theirs a few guns (cannons,flintlocks,ect.) But the newest tech is breach loaders! I feel thats perfect for my use. And they had revolving rifles and pistols in the 1500s, so I'm OK with the lot of that stuff if you got the money for it.
I hope to make a WW2-Medieval mash short film one day, I've been working on it for years and plan to use guns and swords! Good work and keep it up!
so..... just ww1
@@mryellow6918 oof, it does sound like that. 😁 More like LOTR but Aragon has a ak-47.
I need to show this to my friend. :D He wrote stories where are flying steampunk ships, ballistas, mechanic golems, knights, rogue hunters, magic... But anything that do BANG is "unbalancing" everything. :D
He is arguing with something like "yeah, its about art of fight, they need to train hard and sword fighting is about who is better". He absolutely forgot about bows, crossbows etc. Its steampunk, we created this world togeather. He just never shot from anything.
He doesn't sound too bright when it comes to history
@@jonathanwells223 He's just not fan of firearms and in his eyes firearms dont belong to that world. :D i say they fit there. No need to make them like guns today, but pepper box guns, percussion revolvers, muskets, they fit in that world perfectly. Same as crossbows, swords, bows, spears.
Lets say our character have shotgun. Two barrels. Is ambushed by group of bandits. So he tooks two of them instantly, but what about others?
The biggest problem of firearms in fantasy is not that it's overpowered, but that they can be easily mass produced, unlike magic and dragons, so to speak. So once you introduce firearms, the "common folks" of the setting will change the greatest and the power balance will shift towards them.
Firearms were truly the great equaliser. Sure that wizard spent decades mastering the divine arts and sure, they can call down a meteorite to level a city, but Farmer McPeasant has had a month training with his rifle and can put a £2 wide hole through centre mass of a human sized target, at 300 metres before said Master of the Arcane arts is even aware that they're there.
There are other factors that come with firearms - for example, grenades. They are much easier to make, require less skill, and can be spammed (if you have enough of them). They can also be utterly devastating, depending on what you pair them with - e.g. some sort of magic shrapnel. You can also easily pair them with regular melee weapons since you can throw a couple of grenades into a room full of monsters before rushing in. Also, you can get flash-bangs which could be utterly devastating in places like dungeons.
Very cool content. Was trying to get our DM to get into some gun play or even do a "Dark Tower" style campaign. Also, nice rifle! The side loading Henry is a definite upgrade to the tube feed.
Look at the ttrpg "we deal in lead" based off the dark tower books.
I once DM'd an apocalypse themed DnD-esque game in which I tried to emphasize the necessity for use of both melee combat (and magic where applicable) in tandem with guns.
The guns were anything but nerfed. Most enemies could be put down with a couple good shots from even a pistol. The way that I worked around the possibility of the players steamrolling enemies was by emphasizing ammo counts and reload speed.
Sure, one or two shots from a rifle could take down an enemy, but that would be two of four bullets that they've got access to gone, with no telling how long it'll be until more show up. That and the need to reload after a given amount of shots made melee a much more attractive option for the players when they weren't fighting a large foe, and it made the gun players think a lot more about their attacks than the magic and melee players.
You've given me some great RPG character ideas :) Custom alchemist class - clockwork guns, ammo would consume ingredients and have to be pre-loaded before leaving camp like a mage preparing a spell. Muzzle-loaded guns could be used in combat without prep, with maybe 3 turns to load and one to fire.
Not exactly. They are for us, humans. But with literal giants and immortals around, even basic bow becomes a weird factor with strength levels and skill masteries involved. And that's before magic enters the room by breaking down the door... And then even more broken magic breaks down all walls too.
Try playing "Gate" scenario against a bunch of tabletop munchkins, who abuse mind control, resurrection, teleportation and so on. Wonder Woman and Thor are literary RPG protagonists in "modern setting":D
Not going to lie, but I like to see a game where modern wargame players face DnD players.
@@kovona Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2?;)
@@kovona who will win, a guy who commands one dude or a guy who commands a literal army
Melee weapons are still useful today. It's just that the types & situational contexts have changed a bit. These days it's all about up close & personal wrestling type situ's mostly. Something very similar to rondel dagger in armor style stuff as well some other "got nothin' else" SHTF scenarios.
Old Warhammer Fantasy (before the End Times and creation of Age of Sigmar) I think did a good job using firearms in a fantasy setting. Plus they got to have some fun creating their own fantastical gunpowder based units like the Empire Steam Tank or the Dwarf Flame Cannon.
I think guns could work like "magic" equivalent to bows. Like magic needs materials at higher lvl to use, just make ammo for guns expensive. At the moment I think many play bows etc in a way that you don't even need to buy arrows. So basically you get a buff to your ranged option by spending more money.
There's a lot you can do using muzzle-loaders that take forever to shoot more than once, but I actually did the opposite. Instead of using black powder, there's this magical rust-like substance which has a side effect of slowly dissolving the projectile as it flies, heavily limiting the effective range. It's super-light so you can carry loads of shot, has lowered recoil and chamber pressure so fairly advanced loading mechanisms are available much earlier than expected, and the stuff is so plentiful that nobody has found the need to experiment with a replacement.
What's cool about this, in addition to giving melee a chance to close in with guns, is that bows keep their niche as light, mobile artillery. You can have actual artillery too, and the grueling battles they imply, but the guns are only a charge away from being overrun. Same applies for naval battles, so boarding is favored.
I think the range of the Sharps or other "buffalo guns" could be an issue in a fantasy campaign. You get to reach out and touch someone from well out of range most magic attacks. Still not the only weapon available to a character though.
Is it really in a world where people can become invisible, become immune to missile weapons, teleport, and summon demons?
A longbow can launch an arrow several hundred meters, at about 100 meters the front post of the irons on my AR15 covers a human-sized target. Not saying that a bow is comparable in accuracy or damage, but in a fantasy setting I don't think the range is all that different, especially sans-optics.
@@TheWarmotor Max LB range in D&D is 200 yards at penalty, 50 yards with no penalty. TBH it's not THAT much of a stretch to say firearms in your fantasy world have a similar range. Either way it's so far off the battle grid that you're just making up numbers anyway. :P It's pretty rare for D&D campaigns having much interaction going on at that distance. Cities, dungeons, forests and what not.
I mean even in situations like sieges/battles you could almost argue that bows have a bit of an advantage. It's hard to arch a bullet over a wall/hill. :P
too be fair, 5e long bows have a range of 150/600 so they can out range many early level spells just with bows.
Meteor Strike has a casting range of one mile. It's basically magical artillery. And most shooting is only really done at 300 yards/meters when done with small arms. There are plenty of spells and other DnD weapons that can effect that range.
just balance them the same exact way we do in real life.
ammo scarcity.
edit: also, please let the Fighter have more long ranged options that benefit from their martial proficiency. (multi-attack is hardcore locked down by ranged and that's just unfair)
think of the Fighters!
Good points. I think the best kind of storytelling to get ideas for balancing guns and melee weapons might be post-apocalypse stories. In those settings, guns are powerful weapons, but because ammo is usually very limited, melee weapons can be a great alternative. You might run out of bullets, but a machete will not need to be reloaded. The movie The Book of Eli I think really captures this idea well.
In a setting where people who can turn into Kaiju, create massive circles of fire, throw lightning, and create an army of undead, a guy with a gun is not that overpowered
It is very overpowered at the lower level and can stop everyone else from achieving said land changing feats in the first place. Having the potential is nice and all, but you need to GET THERE in the first place.
@@rpk321 There are magic swords and armour which would also be overpowered for low-level characters, but these are largely balanced around being hard to find or prohibitively expensive for such a character. In a setting where firearms are that powerful yet not common, it would make sense for them to be balanced in the same manner.
@@rpk321 then git gud and quit whining, wizards need to work for their xp, they're a support class!
@@PhiloticSymmetrist You Don't even HAVE access to them in the beginning in the first place. Not that they are super rare or expensive.
There come a point where something provide so much value that increasing the cost means nothing.
So either you lock it up or reduce the value provided.
@@jonathanwells223 Or you accept your guns suck because it is unbelievably difficult to balance without throwing out the fun for the one who choose gun or for everyone else.
I'd like to see a skeleton army equipped with a Springfield trapdoor
That's the cheap and easy equalizer I use for any magic, firearms, hypertech laser swords etc. If you have a spell or a kevlar vest you don't have a monopoly on it.
If you have the thing, the next gnoll you run into might just as well have the thing. Now there's three goblins with looted revolvers yelling to toss over the food.
One way I've seen the ranged vs melee solved in multiple stories was that ranged weapons require each projectile to be enchanted, as well as the ranged weapon itself, and in another one there were certain effects that required a good power source (sci-fi for that one, but the principle can still apply) which was unsuitable for projectiles. In that last one explosives could use such effects, but were of course single use.
As many have mentioned already, bows are much stealthier, but another good point for them is that you can recover your ammo, and even if an arrow has broken you can fletch a new one out in the wilds. A gun would be completely limited to the ammo you bring with you, unless you have a jury-rigged style weapon where you throw gunpowder in and any junk lying around, but even then you can only bring so much gun powder.
And of course, lets not forget that smoke-less powder is a very different beast compared to black powder, smoke can build up and blind your position if indoors, smoke residue in the barrel can cause jamming. If the weapon has bigger tolerances it'd instead have shorter range/less power or simply lack in accuracy.
Mixing some of those options you can easily have melee weapons being the best for armoured people and big targets that could simply ignore smaller wounds, guns for supporting close quarter melee fighters or initiating, arrows for silent take-downs or getting a critical hit like taking out an eye of a dragon before combat starts. And guns would be a problem in the wilderness, besides being more expensive to acquire and load, making them a poor choice for travellers, high-way bandits, but optimal for guards, armies, and so on.
I'm a big fan of how Code Vein incorporates the bayonette weapon type, as in rifles with permanently affixed bayonnettes. ... I mean, the guns fire literal blood in various flavours from long range to a fan of 5 going out in a 90degree arc, but still.
The characters mainly use them as melee weapons and occasionally fire them when practical, usually as if they were swords or spears.
Ayyy a fellow Code Vein player!
I definitely agree especially with how the magic system works. It’s more risky to fire your bayonet during a fight due to the lower damage than high grade spells but it tends to be lest costly as a result.
God eater 2 and 3 have that too. You eat bites to reload with your melee form, then you fire that energy back at the target with whatever gun type you happen to have equiped
I think magic (assuming it's even remotely common) would sharply limit guns' use on the battlefield. A wizard with Heat Metal could destroy a cannon instantly and take out the whole crew, or use Fireball and wipe out an entire platoon of musketeers.
One thing that I think would make it fair for firearms is caliber. You can go for higher calibers but each cartridge is gonna weigh more compared to lesser calibers and gonna have have more recoil, with some anti tank rifles having enough recoil to dislocate your shoulder if not used correctly. If you chose lower calibers you are gonna be able to carry more but they don’t do alot of damage. They’ll also cost differently, with higher and/or specialty cartridges gonna cost more than more common low caliber ammunition.
the bayonet could have been invented much earlier in history simply by stuffing a thin hilted dagger at the end of a late medieval hand cannon
Makes me wonder if they actually tried that, but found the barrels to be too heavy to swing effectively. OR heavy enough to use as a bludgeoning device so they didn't need a bayonet.
The plug bayonet was a thing that was invented during the Renaissance. Which is literally a dagger designed to fit into the barrel of a gun.
That is exactly what the original bayonets were.
Thin handled daggers known as plug bayonets (because they pluged the barrel).
The average DnD gun is no more powerful than a mundane crossbow or longbow, except they have a misfire chance, and immediately looses out once magic arrows enter the scene.
People just can't handle that gunpowder was invented before high medieval knights were
"People just can't handle that gunpowder was invented before high medieval knights were"
Really don't get your point here. Yes, gunpowder WAS invented before the traditional medieval knight. However its usefulness in battle was often questionable at best until firearms were invented and heavily refined, after which point firearms rendered knights obsolete.
The point about how guns operate in DnD and other fantasy settings is perfectly reasonable. Guns kinda aren't OP when wizards can stop time and spam you with magic arrows or turn you into a sheep.
I helped a GM Friend figure out the solution to that problem. Worked out how magic based special ammo would work (Incendiary, Stun, Armor Piercing, etc) based on item lore. His personal favorite were Anti-Magic bullets. We also figured out that The Forgotten Realms has the technology level to make self contained cartridges rather than flintlock or cap & ball. So guns in his campaign were a viable option.
Gunpowder could have been invented before "high medieval knights", but certainly not working guns. Those are really 1350 forward, for most part.
"Those staves... Is every soldier in their army a wizard?"
"Yes. Those are magical weapons called "guns." The spell-caster uses fire magic to create a small spark inside the staff that triggers an explosion that is used to shoot out a small pebble."
"They don't even have to be in the proximity to take their enemy out..."
"Its the reason the imperial army fell"
One thing to remember :
For some time the western frontier of the US was retracting due to the comanche being able to outgun or outbow US cavalry wich was using single shot fire arms ,
The comanche where using recurve bows and where doing a pretty unique shooting tecnique in wich they held arrows the bow hand and shooting from the bow hand side ,
Allowing them to shoot with both high precision and a high fire rate ...
The tide turned with the revolver wich could match the firing rate of the comanche bow and the rest is history ...
But still , bows can compete against guns , heck revolvers and lever actions where specifically made to outgun bows ,
you also have the whole fact that this was effectively a pre industrial/industrial state with a large population and a professional army was fighting against basically steppe nomads and a reason for the US being able to succed was also them driving bisons to almost extinction to do scorched earth against the comanche ,
But that's a whole can of worms ...
What i was saying is that a bow requires much lower tolerances and less specialized work to be crafted , compared to a revolver , expecially if the blacksmith guild is keeping the revolver manufacturing process a secret to keep the monopoly , make an awful lot of money from it and convincing local nobles to give them a lot of money to devise new bigger cannons with stealth caracteristics ...
Making revolvers and lever action guns somenthing that is kinda hard to get and somenthing you'd prefer to keep secret since everyone will try to steal those ...
That combined with a much more whidespread bow culture in wich bows are shot all the times to defend from monters and stuff could be a nice explaination as to why revolvers and bows coexist
With a gun, you can have up to three weapons in one: the gun itself, the buttstock as a bludgeon and possibly a bayonet, which can make a rifle act like a pike.
You could put an axe head on it or something like that too
@@the_inquisitive_inquisitor all 1 would have to do is make the rolls harder if you attach a bayonet or axe to it. So your less accurate.
@@frostguard1283 Honestly a musket shouldn't be all that accurate to begin with, but it should pack a wallop if you get a good hit.
Magic is the real OP thing.
And it should be, it's freakin' magic.
I'm all in for more guns in RPGs
A wizard that can throw a fireball maybe 4 times maximum before needing a full 8 hours seems pretty weeny compared to an armed mob of angry peasants with guns, and I'm all for it.
I mean, for me at least, it all depends on the setting of the world and the type of gun or weapons. For example, this anime Gate: Jietai shows how a trained modern army equipped with military guns, communication systems and other type of modern weapons like tanks, artillery and airborne vehicles, practically destroyed a fantasy medieval army like it was nothing and stormed a fortress in matters hours. Now try that same army against factions of Warhammer Fantasy for example, it won’t be as simple as the other one because they are more “powerful” because of the really hard magic of that world setting.
Hell Yeah Gate was my first thought too! The balance of power is dependent on the science/magic levels of both sides and the locations they fight in
Judging how a Empire playthrough with with a gunpowder based army can kick ass, yeah but no, the JSDF will still steamroll any factions in warhammer fantasy especially when in Gate, they weren't even using modern weaponry as they still need to leave behind their prssent day equipment in Earth to defend against other nations. It won't be simple sure, but I highly doubt the factions will be doing much to Earth's military. The clans in Fall of the Samurai can probably single handedly defeat them especially with the armstrong cannons
Also, a police officer can tell you that if an attacker with a knife charges at the officer who has a gun (if the attacker is within 20 feet) they have a real chance at stabbing the officer. Guns are OP IRL, but in real life conflicts there are a lot of factors that can change who wins.
Seems to me the big issue with D&D players is they *want* firearms to be OP, because that is very action-moving "Ima god!" power rush feeling. But, in rules-as-written firearms are actually pretty dull, thus a lot of home-brewing (often resulting in OP, to make them "feel" more like modern power fantasy cinematic).
Honestly this. People want to argue that a bullet SHOULD be incredibly deadly...somehow more so than getting run through with a sword or having your helmet cleaved with an axe, apparently, which is where it suddenly makes no sense.
Fantasy weapons are not somehow foam props that deal no damage compared to firearms...
Firearms as alternative magic delivery is always interesting. in dnd terms it can be a Dex caster with limited bonus (like medium armor has a max +2 from dex) from either int (for more methodological class/weapon) or cha (for more instinctual shooters). And different rounds can work like metamagic.
I didn't understand why I should make up a bunch of special rules. If a magic arrow can do a thing, there's a chance you find a magic Garand bullet that can also do the thing.
The hobos just get a few shotguns and AR-10's together and mug a vampire, simple as that. You roll to hit, try to beat their AC and maybe you hit the goon. The guns do slightly different damage dice depending on caliber.
Wizards tend to prefer pistols because they can easily stow them to do their magic, and they don't encumber as much. Then they can wear a kevlar vest.
@@SusCalvin coz it can be fun and we don't have a class like that? I mean we're talking about a game based on rule books with updates and expansions so make the rules if you want to. I just prefer rules embedded in the system rather than simple add-ons
@@amanita8397 My alternative is to just play a level 1 fighter with a shotgun with rules that can be summed up in a few paragraphs.
You're a fighter, you got +1 to do the fighty stuff and now you do it with a shotgun. It's not a special weapon I need extra rules for. In the rules we test, they do 1d12 damage while a pistol does 1d8. A sword does 1d10. You obviously need to hold it in two hands, but you don't need to spell that out.
@@SusCalvin isn't that just crossbow alternative though?
@@amanita8397 The downside with a crossbow is that you need to ready it by manually pulling a string back. I'll have to check what the bow/crossbow rules say in Esoteric. If you want the string to last, you shouldn't walk around with it pulled all the time. But you can hold it in a ready position and aim a lot easier. In MERP, crossbows acted slightly before bows.
In AD&D 2e, missile weapons had different firing rate. A bow shoots two arrows per round. A dude with darts can toss three darts per round. A light crossbow shot once per round, and a heavy crossbow every second round. They did different damage at different range. A dude flicking three darts was surprisingly dangerous.
My favorite scenario is zombies during the Bronze Age. Could you imagine what would happen if Spartans had to stop a zombie horde with the phalanx.
I think as long as they learned to cover the flank it would be a snow plow though a snow drift.
I actually imagine organized melee units with shields and spears would work wonders against a sufficiently small horde of zombies.
@@eainjones9509 I suppose the only weakness the Spartans would have would be that zombies never tire, so depending on the horde size it could last days. That being said, it’s amazing how much fighting ability humans have lost over the centuries as technology has improved.
@@Matt20911985 that may be true, and it is definitely size dependant, but what the zombies have as a disadvantage is the inability to defend themselves.
Remember how long sparta held back the Persians? Those zombies don't stand a chance.
What's most important is the setting of your campaign. Maintaining the fantasy of your world. In my campaign I have a high fantasy setting where magic is commonplace, and technology is in early to mid Renaissance. Countries have navies with cannon, men-at-arms with pollaxe and halberd, and Wizards that can drop Meteors from the sky. I balance firearms as a specialized weapon. Some soldiers are specifically trained in use of early blackpowder firearms. However, in a world where you can call down the wrath of God to smite your enemies, guns are hardly overpowered. It's more about maintaining the fantasy for the players. They get to be the cool baddass they want to be with sword, Fireball, or musket.