Buy a crossbow. Call it a rifle.

Just say that: Hand Xbow = Musket Pistol, Xbow = Musket, Superior Xbow = Rifled Musket.

>>8887750
has the right of it. You're working with 4th edition, so there's really no need to sweat details. Refluffing is the easiest way to go.

I homebrewed some before. I believe it was like 30 gp for one, it had range 10/20, did 2d6, high crit, load minor. bullets were like 2 gp for a box of 20.

Well, not really. I made some kustom rules for DWARVEN ENGINEERING JAH guns. Modded hand crossbows and 'eavy crossbows. Works out fine for us.

>>Primitive bolt action rifle
>>Middle renaissance era

Hate to burst your bubble, but that's silly. Plus, firearms from that period of time were horribly unreliable and couldn't hit a barn door from a hundred yards.

Firearms were mostly used by armies, where volleys from massed amounts of rifles could actually pose a threat.

A single person wouldn't have much luck with shoddy quality rifles from that era. Plus, reload times would be a bitch.

>>8887790

polearms were used by massive armies to make a meaningful formation, but you have people using them individually.

>>8887807

Hurp dee durp apples is a fruits so therefore oranges is same.

What makes it even easier is that the Character Builder has magic bullets available to buy, so it fits right in.

>>8887790
Simple. Our fantasy guns are better than our real ones. Because this is fantasy and not everything has to be entirely realistic because a man just shot a gorram fireball at a woman who just turned into a male bear.

>>8887870
Those would be sling bullets, genius.

>>8887898

So if you can go around doing that, why bother developing firearms?

Probably doesn't help but here's the guns for spelljammer in D20.

>>8887790
Yeah, but the D&D weapons list isn't terribly concerned with verisimilitude in the first place.

As long as it FEELS like you're using an old-fashioned gun, it doesn't really matter exactly how accurate it is or precisely how long it takes to reload.

>>8887914

I know that, dingus.

However, I found it hilarious, and allowed it for use in firearm magazines.

>using a primitive bolt action rifle
>primitive
>bolt action
but you do realize that bolt action rifles are really advanced firearms, and that they require a bunch of other discoveries to function properly? [like smokeless powder, cartridges, rifling]

also - firearms in a system with progressive HP are stupid. The argument that you better take a hit or are able to defend from it falls short when supersonic projectiles come into play. And if you set the damage for a rifle at some arbitrary level [6d6 for example] you'll still end up with characters that can take an entire firing squad to the face and simply ignore it.

>>8887916

Same reason people invented crossbows?

Dunno, lol, et cetera.

>>8887790

You may be right. I just wanted to make a character that was a bit unique than the ususal bow/ x-bow user. She is a member of the city guard where the novel begins though.

I'm using the Zombie Survival Guide as a small influence on the storyline. Mostly that a zombie doesn't die unless you decapitate/headshot/kill with radiant damage, etc, so I was building her as a sniper.

>>8887919
1d12 is a good price for a rifle.

>>8887933
You don't understand how HP works.

>>8887954
That kind of price will kill commoners roughly 3/4ths of the time.

>>8887946

Well, if you take the advice i gave and use the terrible firearms of the renaissance, enjoy dying.

I'd say you'd be better off with a crossbow. Sorry mang.

>>8888011
The three musketeers were supposed to be from the most famous french musket infantry unit, they're most well known for using rapiers rather than their muskets.

>>8887972
enlighten me

I would recommend making explosive crossbow bolts rather than firearms. But if you must create firearms, give them big damage, for example, brutal 2 and a d12 damage die, make them require a training feat and long load times. In all honesty, as rules describe actions, reloading a firearm should be a standard action. Being unable to fire every turn might make it feel more like a primitive firearm. You could give it a higher proficiency bonus to compensate for not being able to fire every turn since that is very crippling.

>>8887933
>also - firearms in a system with progressive HP are stupid.

You could say the same thing about bows or, well, anything. HP doesn't make sense, it's just a game mechanic.

So does OP want our statblocks or just ideas?

>>8888108
>But if you must create firearms, give them big damage, for example, brutal 2 and a d12 damage die, make them require a training feat and long load times.

Good god, don't do this. The major advantage of firearms is that they take less training to use than bows.

There's no particular reason, fluff-wise, why D&D style firearms have to be particularly worse than D&D style crossbows, or other missile weapons. Of course, missile weapons back in 3.5 were terrible to begin with, so there you go.

First thing you could do is re-fluff it slightly so there's more of an alchemical bent to the weapons/gunpowder. After all, this is a setting where you can find magical weapons lying around at level 1-2 anyway; no reason every firearm in the world is historically-appropriate-shitty. Maybe you have paper cartridges and a sort of breech-loading mechanism, so it's slighly less bullshit that you can be reloading it every round. Multiple shot attacks become double charges, or shotgun pellets, or what have you. Adding flammables or acid capsules to your loads gives you elemental damage. That kind of thing.

Ultimately, you could have weird things like a magic blunderbuss that eats scrap metal and converts it to bullets, or that sort of thing.

Alternatively, you could build it sort of like the way the Witch Hunters played in Warhammer Online. You have a melee weapon and a ranged weapon, and you tend to save the ranged weapon for close-in or opportunistic shots. So something like, you stab-stab-stab, and then step up to point blank and pull the trigger in his face. But by that point, you're basically inventing a whole new class, including attack abilities.

>>8888123

Pistol
Ranged 10/20
Superior Ranged
+3 Proficiency
Damage 1d8
Price: 250 gp
One-Handed
Magazine size: 8 rounds
Reload Free

Rifle
Ranged 20/40
Superior Ranged
+3 Proficiency
Damage 1d12
Price: 500 gp
Two-Handed
Magazine size: 10 rounds
Reload Minor

This is what I use in my game. Your tastes may vary.

>>8888074
Combination between pain tolerance, stamina, actual physical integrity, will to fight, etc.

The "bloodied" condition in 4e represents just that; the first blow to actually draw blood. Until then the assumption is that your armor, athleticism, etc. has managed to completely deflect or avoid all previous attacks (misses) or has blunted otherwise successful attacks, but not obviated the "hits".

In other words, maybe that firing squad "hit" you, but they were allr eally just grazing shots, were mostly absorbed by armor/magic-mental shielding, or you barely got out of the way, but repeatedly doing so has you bruised, scratched, worn out, and your senses dull.

When you are "bloodied", that means you just took one to the shoulder. 0 hp and less means you just been jut shot, boy, and you're on the ground.

>>8888123

Either would be awesome.

>>8888108

I was thinking of making reloading a full round action, but with the Rapid Reload feat allowing reloading as a standard action.

>>8887735
A method for such a rifle to work is rather simple. Mage hand imparts 5 pounds of force. if a single mage hand spell set to push out the end of the berrel anything that comes into its area when the trigger is pulled is set ever (lets say) 1 centimeter, you get a magical railgun. The bolt action could easily be to mimic the phyiscal gesture that readys the spell.

for more treditional options: Create flame targeted on gunpowder, or a scaled down fireball.

for more "Is this sci-fi?" high magic options:
Magical Cartridge containing the energy needed to propel 1 bullet 10/20 squares at excessive speed. Comes in prebuilt (no bullet so you can use your own, but takes minor action to load) or mass manufactured veritys (Bullet is mundane, but loading is a free action).

Damage wise you have to either let people use a score, or up gun (irony) the damage dice to make it viable.

>>8888228
That could work. But if that's the case make sure the damage output is worth it.

>>8888269

By the way, if reloading is a standard action, could the user reload then fire as long as he/she doesn't move?

Most casualties in wars before the 1840's (after disease) were inflicted in hand-to-hand fighting.

The point of firearms was to break the enemy's will. Both due to long reload times and to inaccuracy, they couldn't physically annihilate an enemy formation.

Muzzle-loading (and some primitive breech-loaders, but NOT bolt-action. Still single-shot) rifles were used by hunters and marksmen, so if that's what you're going for, then that's fine. Just make sure you're also carrying a big knife, maybe an axe or a bow in addition to the rifle. You'll want to have some way to fight once you've fired your shot and the enemy is too close to allow you to reload.

A rifle takes longer to reload than a musket.

>>8888228
if so it needs to hit seriusly hard, and said charicter ought to have a LARGE brace of pistols to back it up.

perhaps instead of proficency giving you just the + to hit, it lets you reload as standard, so that with the feat it becomes a move action. you cant move and shoot, but at least you can shoot each round.

>>8888208

Not OP, that seems useful

>>8888297

RAW, no. Only one standard action per turn, even if you don't use your move action.

>>8888297
nope, firing is a standard action.

Also if its going to eat my standard to reload with rapid reload feat, make it 2d6 brutal 2 high crit. this makes it a terrfyingly lethal weapon that inflicts consistantly horrific damage. every other turn.

>>8887870
Those are for a sling you buttfucked nigger.

Guns: Copy them off longbows (rifles) or shortbows (pistols), drop proficiency bonus to +0, state that proficient chars treat vs AC attacks as vs Reflex, bump up damage by one step, and count as superior weapons instead of masterwork weapons

done

or flavor avengers as using blessed pistols for their impelement attacks. whatever.

>>8888393

I KNOW, YOU CANDLE-SNIFFING FUCKFENCE.

BUT I SAID THEY COULD BE PUT IN GUNS IF YOU BOUGHT THE GUN VERSION OF BULLET.

>>8888211
and that's exactly why progressive HP and boolats don't like each other

>In other words, maybe that firing squad "hit" you, but they were allr eally just grazing shots
you know what's the most difficult shot to make? A grazing shot. The bullet has to barely nick the flesh to do only superficial damage. If it goes through the body, then hydrostatic shock will cause a shitload of damage. With good defense you can defend from a knife in such a way that you'll minimize the damage done to you. You cannot do the same against a firearm.

>were mostly absorbed by armor/magic
i'm cool with that. Not like armor isn't represented in a shitty way in D&D, but armor/magic stops boolats is cool.

>mental shielding
disbelieving serious trauma?

>or you barely got out of the way, but repeatedly doing so has you bruised, scratched, worn out, and your senses dull.
How the fuck do you get out of the way of a bullet?

also - a hit from a bullet is counted as a miss most of the time?

>When you are "bloodied", that means you just took one to the shoulder.
a large caliber round [and they didn't have anything else than large in the early days of firearms] to the shoulder will kill you, simple as that. It will rip the shoulder joint apart, cause massive tissue damage and sever the axillary artery, which will cause you to bleed out in a minute or two. Also - you have nerve bundles in your shoulder. Having a high calibre round instead of nerves is bad.

Hey guys, Gene Starwind here, just letting you know that my caster shells are going to be in your next campaign. Feel free to make it a crossbow that requires a use magical devices check.

>>8888342

Damn, thought so.

>>8888319

She'll be the group's sniper, hiding and headshoting zombies and other undead while the other group members engage in hand to hand combat or spells, so that works.

>>8888326

I like this idea.

She has the Twin Strike ranger at-will power, but I didn't like that she would be able to attack twice like that with a old style firearm. So I like the idea of reducing the number of attacks to one and upping the damage to 2W and giving a bonus to hit, like DEX +2 or 3 vs. AC.

>>8888133
They're easy to pick up and pull the trigger, hoping that the bullet goes somewhere similar to where you're aiming.

To use them well, though, takes a ton of training.

This is what non-proficient penalties, and superior bonuses represent.

>>8888413
You did not know that, and are now trying to back peddle because you're the retarded son of a field working nigger's second choice crack whore.

You said bullets were in the Character Builder, not that you house ruled them into being the same as sling projectiles. You can't escape that.

>>8888465

Forgot to add that I' m really appreciative to all you fa/tg/uys for the ideas you've given me tonight. /tg/ is the best board (alongside /m/) for a reason.

>>8888465
>So I like the idea of reducing the number of attacks to one and upping the damage to 2W and giving a bonus to hit, like DEX +2 or 3 vs. AC.

I think the ease of homebrewing in 4.0 is it's biggest strength.

>>8888510

Yes. You are half correct.

The day I saw bullets in the character builder I indeed said, "cool, gun ammo." One of my players corrected me, saying they were meant for slings, as sling ammo is also called bullets. I said, "well, if you stick them in a gun they'll work just fine."

So while in fact I was mistaken, I had learned of my mistake before stating my abortion of a houserule.

(In before I'm_trolling_but_no_it_was_a_joke.jpg)

>>8888319

No military has ever, ever, fought to annihilation. 10% casualties in a single battle could break even elite soldiers.

Firepower became decisive in warfare around 1700, with improved firearms, paper cartridges, ring bayonets, steel ramrods, improved firing mechanisms and a dozen other innovations making infantry soldiers with melee weapons obsolete.

Smoothbore muskets in the 1700s were really quite good. Rifled weapons were even better, and could kill individuals at 500 meters.


That said, you are quite right that they didn't dominate close combat. Carrying many pistols was awkward, and carrying several muskets or rifles was totally impractical. With weapons that required at least 13 seconds and more commonly 15 to 30, or more then three hundred for rifles. Swords could be very effective in close combat if you could get their, either by rideing someone down on a horse or fighting on a ship or inside a building.

Fun fact: Most wounds were inflicted by melee weapons because by the time of the Napoleonic wars most injuries were sustained -after- a unit had broken ranks and were being perused by cavalry to prevent them from rallying.

>>8888459
> you know what's the most difficult shot to make? A grazing shot.
Funny, seems to happen to action heroes in movies and novels all the time.
What are people in D&D games playing as again?
> With good defense you can defend from a knife in such a way that you'll minimize the damage done to you. You cannot do the same against a firearm.
I can't. MAGDAK THE BARBARIAN can.
> disbelieving serious trauma?
More along the lines of psionics was what I was thinking.
>or you barely got out of the way, but repeatedly doing so has you bruised, scratched, worn out, and your senses dull.
How the fuck do you get out of the way of a bullet?
I don't, but I'm not me. I AM MAGDAK.
> also - a hit from a bullet is counted as a miss most of the time?
A hit from a sword is a miss most of the time too.
> a large caliber round [and they didn't have anything else than large in the early days of firearms] to the shoulder will kill you
Who is me again?
>which will cause you to bleed out in a minute or two
Funny how that pretty much never happens in D&D, especially 4e.
"Gah, I'm bleeding out! Better roll a 10 or higher on the end of my turn!"

Why not make guns powerful but not overwhelming and represent the ability of a gun to be fired in a single devastating shot by giving them a string of powers?


You get a feat and it gives you proficiency with firearms, and lets you swap a class Encounter power for a firearms Encounter power. Maybe add others that give you utility or daily firearm powers.

Snowballing here, but the encounter could be between a single, high power shot for lots of damage, a crippleing shot that slows a target, and a knockback shot that uses Hollywood physics to throw someone backward when shot.

>>8888700

The Utility powers for guns are harder. Maybe a shotgun diplomacy power that lets you get a big bonus to intimidate by shoving a gun in someone's face. Or a more prosaic one that lets you quick-draw and make a single gunshot at the start of combat, before normal imitative?

Daily powers might let you use a Headshot power to do MASSIVE DAMAGE and daze someone?

>>8888666

More proof 4e is the problem.

STATS FOR A RIFLE:

Exotic Weapon

5d20 damage

range increment: 50'

reload time: 6 rounds, 12 with no rapid reload feat, 24 if you aren't proficient

Cost: 6000gp
Ammo cost: 8sp per ball, 10000gp per pound of gun powder (good for about 50 shots)

THAT IS ALL, DISCUSSION OVER.

>>8888700
>>8888761

That's something to think about. But for now, I need to get some sleep. I have class early tommorrow and I'll be mucking around in the woods all day digging holes (fucking Soil Genesis class). Night /tg/, thanks for the ideas!

>>8888820

That's bad and you should feel bad.

>>8888845

If it can't bring down a giant on a lucky shot, it's not worth putting guns in a game.

>>8888211
Or dodging the bullets until you're too fatigued to actually dodge the one that hits. Or using improvised cover to block until it's chewed up.

A swordfight can be abstracted - HP can represent losing the will to fight against a better swordsman.

>>8888857

>>8888820
> implying simulationism is wholly possible or desirable in a setting where cat-person witches throw fireballs, man-mountains can have their heads gnawed on for half an minute straight by a dragon and be just fine, wuxia ascetics actually can leap 50 feat from a standing position, and a good enough roll will allow the cunning thief to Fonzie open that rusted out lock.

>>8888857
>unplayable mess
>good

>>8888882

Don't fuck with guns, bro.

>>8888896

that stat block is shitty, though.

>>8888911

Try getting shot in the face, MAGDAK, and see how long it takes to realize your skull just imploded.

Granted, that's a lucky roll, but the 5d20 is to account for the stupidity of Ye Olde Rifle. It can do 5 damage. It can do 100 damage. Hell, crit and it can do even more. 20-20x3 crit, btw.

lol at shooting a tarrasque in the eye, travelling to its brain, and magically severing the part responsible for motor function.

>>8888895
B^U

>>8888977

I would think as a barbarian, Mr. Magdak can take upwards of 100 damage. He should be just fine.

All in all, fuck Ye Olde Rifle.

>>8888990

>>8889012

THEN DON'T PUT FUCKING GUNS IN THE GAME.

>>8889034

I already have.

>>8888575
You are horrible at back peddling.

Either way, a "bullet" does not include a shell, gun powder, and striker. The bullet is only the metal at the end that's being fired from the gun. The whole thing is call a cartridge.

So you're even more of a dumbass past your first mistake.

>>8887735

HEY, OP
>>8888977
SEE THIS SHIT RIGHT HERE?

THIS IS WHY MOST GAME WRITERS DON'T BOTHER.

I'M SURE IF WW COULD HAVE GOTTEN AWAY WITH WRITING A MODERN SYSTEM WITHOUT GUNS IN IT THEY WOULD HAVE. THEY EXPRESSLY GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO KEEP GUNS OUT OF EXALTED TO AVOID THIS SHIT.

WHETHER HE'S TROLLING OR SINCERE, HE IS THE REASON WHY GAME DESIGNERS WON'T EVEN TOUCH THE SHIT. THEY'D BE BURIED IN A PILE OF FAGGOTRY.

>>8888977
>part responsible for motor function.

You are as retarded as Shas.

>>8889034
> NOTHING IN THE GAME IS REALISTIC, BUT GUNS MUST BE OR YOU CAN'T HAVE THEM SO SAYS REAL WORLD PHYSICS THAT DON'T APPLY TO YOUR GAME

>>8889047

>So you're even more of a dumbass past your first mistake.

I do not dispute this. And as someone who rages over the differentiation of clip and magazine, you are correct, and I cannot believe I did not notice such a thing earlier.

Still doesn't change how I will operate things.

Good a place to request/offer ideas as any seeing as I've the notion to start a Western themed 4e game.

I'm currently toying with adding fluff copies of hand x-bows as six-shooters, crossbows as shotguns, and short/longbows as short/long-rifles. Also thinking of giving the lot of them either brutal 1 or an ammo capacity similar to rep. crossbows (6 round cylinder pistols; 2 round side-by-side, breach-load shotguns; and 4 round internal magazine rifles) in exchange for their general unstealthyness and possible environmental fragilities if I feel like being a huge dick. Oh, I'm also thinking of have gunfluffed versions for implements as well-- a silver six-shooter in place of a wand, a golden derringer for orb, an orichalcum long-rifle for a staff-- that work the as however those weapon/implement, weaplement, whatevers that already exist do. Pact Blade, I think that's what I'm thinking of.

Thoughts, concerns, fuck-offs?

>>8889080

>REAL WORLD PHYSICS THAT DON'T APPLY TO YOUR GAME

If physics doesn't apply, then why does anything happen? A sword wouldn't cut, a crossbow wouldn't shoot, a fireball wouldn't burn, and everything would be nothing.

Granted, that's an "everything or nothing" approach, but you can't have guns in a game if they can't kill people with one shot. Of course, the massive damage rules are supposed to help this, but everyone knows that those fail.

>>8889051
A crossbow does just as much, if not more, lethal damage than a gunshot. Up until a certain caliber range they are even better at getting through armor because they piercing instead of bludgeon through. But higher caliber options while staying portable are one of the big attractions of guns. A ballista is still a crossbow, and is a VERY high caliber but you can't carry it.

The width of the projectile, piercing nature, and the fact that there's a fucking stick in your head is actually worse than the hole a bullet drills until you get into things like hollow points, jacketed rounds, and extra high calibers.

The real advantages of firearms are portability, rate of fire, easy of care, and low cost of making both the ammunition and the weapon that fires it.

>>8889159

>you can't have guns in a game if they can't kill people with one shot.

There is no law that explicitly says this. As for myself, I pick and choose what physical laws I want. After all, it's a FANTASY WORLD, and anything can happen.

>>8889159
>Granted, that's an "everything or nothing" approach, but you can't have guns in a game if they can't kill people with one shot.

ADDRESS THE ACTION HEROES ISSUE OR DIE IN THE BIGGEST FIRE EVER.

YES, D&D CHARACTERS ARE ACTION HEROES.

>>8889159
> but you can't have guns in a game if they can't kill people with one shot.
Or slice someon'e head off in one lop with an axe, or crush their head in with a single mace blow, or pierce their sternum on the first bow-shot, or...

>>8889187

Action heroes frequently die in fires.

If D&D is action heroes, then may god have mercy on my players, for I shall show none.

I have a player who is obsessed with Ye Olde Rifle and gunmen in general, but but we have Shadowrun for that, I just want hack and slash, a called shot to the head in one round and move on, so if guns are introduced, is there anyway to fuck with the player using them?

>>8889275

HAVE THEM FAIL ALL THE TIME.

POWDER GOT WET
FLINT STRUCK WRONG
RUSTY HINGE
NOT ENOUGH POWDER
TOO MUCH POWDER, BLEW UP RIFLE
SKY IS WRONG COLOR, GUN DOESN'T WORK

>>8889275

Why the explicit need to fuck around with another person's preferential playstyle?

>>8889159
>you can't have guns in a game if they can't kill people with one shot

That's probably the dumbest comment I've seen in this thread that wasn't said by Shas.

An axe does FAR more damage than a gunshot wound and they're not automatic kills. You will say "yeah, because you can hit them in non-vital places." That is completely true with fire arms too.

"But if you don't get a solid hit with an axe it won't go very far in." This is true. With a bullet you either connect or don't. That's an issue with all firearms. There's no way to pull your hit. But to meet that gap: a hit to a non-vital area with an axe is far more severe than a non-vital hit with a bullet. With the bullet you burn and beat a hole in. Your two biggest concerns with a non-organ hit are infection and bleeding. Even a grazing hit with an axe is a serious injury. They rip, tear, and chew through what they hit, and even on light hits can break bones and bruise organs further in than the blade actually cut. So you have a wound that's far more difficult to treat and much more serious.

"Yeah, but if you hit them in the head with a bullet they're automatically dead." I hate Hollywood's new myth that everyone who gets shot in the head dies. People survive headshots all the time.

> but you can't have guns in a game if they can't kill people with one shot.
Guh, this is the biggest load of bullshit, players looking for one-hit kills. Had a guy once, he was playing a half-orc barbarian. He gets captured, disarmed, thrown in jail, and then he busts out, right? Grabs the nearest mook and "grapples and breaks his neck". It's a mook, so DM allows it, right?

For the next 3 sessions until the game fell apart, and for 1 year afterward, this guy did NOTHING but grapple, "snap neck", or attempt to make characters who did so, and just assumed it was some sort of magical auto-win button against humanoid opponents.

GAH.

>>8889307

He doesn' want guns. He doesn' want to say no. He wants his cake, and by god he's gonna eat it.

>>8889307
They're just messing with you because your a douche bag with your own head shoved up your ass screaming at your own organs about how important you think you are.

>>8889359
That player and your DM are a dumbass.

>>8889365

>>8889335

I said can't. Not "Doesn't always gib everything". If it CAN'T kill it instantly, there's no point, it's not a gun.

>>8889395
You use that picture a lot when someone calls you out on being a douche.

No one has ever said "good job" on you using a picture someone else made, nor has anyone made any mention of you having anything remotely similar to a "manly essence."

It will be a good day for this board when you finally down a bunch of your mom's pills and kick the chair.

The problem is that combat in real life is much more quick and decisive than in DnD. You don't go round after round slugging away in real life, fights with weapons are over very fast.

Using guns in DnD brings this out. We are used to guns in real life, and getting shot for real is usually very bad news - if not a kill than a very serious situation indeed. But the mechanics of the game mean that we can't allow this.

>>8889405
It CAN kill a peasant instantly, because they're normal people.

I 100% guarantee you that it's possible to one-shot kill a man with a doorknob in a sock.

>>8889117
well, I would think that you have a good basic idea, Brutal is a good way to cover their lethality. As for implaments, to a point it might be easyer to have that be coustom rounds. How much are you changing things up? is this just Points of Light with wild west weaponry? Then you can probly leave the impalments as is. As for spell casters with guns, why not refluff a class or two as alchemical gunslinger types? I've been working on the idea myself by refluffing Warlock to fit the role. (It helps I like MLGN and FMA for insperation.)

Need to set up the encounters and dailys, but have the basics set down. Hell if you want to see it I could post some of it.

>>8889442
With that logic EVERY WEAPON EVER should have Brutal, because they hurt people.

>>8888977

To be honest, a good hard punch to the face should also kill MAGDAK. Combat in this game is already stupidly unrealistic, at the level of an 80s action movie.

>>8889441

ANYTHING has a chance of killing a person instantly. It's just a matter of the right application in the right location.

>>8889461
That's a good point. There are TONS of cases of people getting punched to death with a single hit.

>>8889482

I've done it once or twice. It's fun.

>>8889471
>It's just a matter of the right application in the right location.

And complete fucking luck.

>>8889507

This as well.

>>8889506
Shut up Shas.

>DnD Combat makes no sense

>MAKE IT MAKE SENSE

Christ, it's like you guys want your players to live or something.

>>8889527

>>8889524
Oh look at you! You're so fucking useful! Monkey can point!

"Ditto!"

OH MY GOD! Such a valuable post!

>>8889461
That better not be dissing 80 action flicks.

Speaking of which, how many times does Jackie Chan get stomped on in Rumble in the Bronx?

That's basically how stupid-touch D&D characters are.

>>8889541
I don't get mad at retarded children. I know they can't help it.

I really wish someone would get around to sterilizing them, though.

>>8889550
>stupid-touch

Like when Shas masturbates. That's "stupid touch."

Poor R'myr... nobody knows that Shas'o is a rank and not a name...

>>8889574
No one gives a shit when it's attached to a faggot of this caliber.

Bolt actions are not primitive, they weren't produced in large numbers until the late 19th C. Flintlocks, wheel locks, and matchlocks are primitive, to the extent that any gun can be.

Bolt actions are definitely modern and many cutting edge firearms are bolt actions because it is still the most reliable and accurate action.

>>8889590

Dude, you're kicking a retarded, blind, half-dead kitten. How do you feel right now?

>>8889574
I looked it up out of curiosity. The moron who named himself that got even more pathetic now that I know it's not a name he even came up with.

itt newfags feeding a troll

>>8889599
I really wish I could get a good stomp in and put the poor little defunct troll out of our misery.

Unfortunately he's furiously stroking his member to all the attention he's getting.

Hopefully enough people will get sick of his stupid horseshit and useless trolling and email moot about it and we can get rid of him too.

>>8889441
As a person who stopped in to talk shit about Shas'o Dicktouch, I apologies for interrupting and derailing your thread. I contributed as much as I could from my fire arms experience, but most of it comes from being from the Middle of Nowhere; in a place where I can shoot things in my yard and get away with it.

On that note: I can confirm that a pig can survive a .45 LC round and still be in good enough shape to run away. Granted, they have very tiny brains and I likely didn't hit it, but still: it shows that hitting the head is not the same as destroying enough of the brain to stop life.

IN SUMMATION OF THIS WHOLE THREAD:

If you try to put guns in a D&D game, it will fail. Horrendously. This is not because the rules will fail, but because they will either be overpowered as hell, not do justice to the real thing, or fall horribly short of all expectations. even without stats, i guarentee that some of your players will not be satisfied with how you do it.

I would talk with my players about it, if I was insane enough to try (Which I was, at one point. Never did again).

TL;DR, gtfo and talk to the people that will be shooting them, not Shas'o R'tard

I just gotta say that for an experienced gunman with a 19th century musket(or later 18th for that matter) it does not take that long to reload. About 15-20 seconds. If during great conditions, dry air, right-coloured sky :P and with the coolness of an action hero. Normally people shat their pants before going into battle because they were normal people.

On the account of damage and such, I have no solution, but, as others have said, the bullet is horribly violent and will sever anything by looking at it. The interesting thing is that people normally did not die from the shot itself but from disease caused by infections etc. The bullet brings cloth fibres and shit into the wound and you die a miserable death in your own shit and blood.

But really, it is HARD to make anything believable in D&D. It is retarded most of the time, I have not played 4th ed. But from my experience from 3.0 and 3.5 I'd say that it is fucked up when my knights "thing" is to throw himself out off cliffs/castles/towers with the enemy just choking him until they hit the ground. Rendering my character... well, normal and the enemy reduced to a pulp.

In short, don't play D&D if you want realism or believeability. Guns are fucking dangerous.

>>8889761
>the bullet is horribly violent and will sever anything by looking at it.

Bullshit. Bullets are not magical murder machines. They have limits.

>>8889839 Of course, I made an exaggeration just to make a point. They do have their limits! I'm sure that if you compare a good hit from a rifle with a perfect blow from a flail, both will be quite effective. Allthough, the bullet travels through the body and spins around, which causes trouble. This a sword or club does not.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but during the Napoleonic wars the standard bullets measured between 18 and 20 mm, which is larger than .50 cal. Such a bullet WILL cause harm, even if it is shot from a smoothbored musket.

>>8889932
The power behind the shot was weak, though.

Plate armor absolutely could stop early gunfire.

Also; how the fuck is "bullets are not magical murder machines" an exaggeration?

By claiming that's an exaggeration you are doing the same as stating "I honestly believe bullets are magical murder machines and will argue to defend this belief."

>>8889754
it depends on the players and the DM. Handled well it can work out. Handled poorly, or by people utterly unwilling to suspend disbelif, it fails.

Going to agree about the bolt action, its rather not renaissance era tech. Now if its one mad clockwork inventors idea, then its not a big deal.

>>8889965
They ARE magical murder machines. :)

Also, love your rage <3

Maybe we should get back on topic.

@ OP: Those guns were matchlocks, check it up.

>>8889932 Of course, I made an exaggeration just to make a point.

That's what I said. Isn't it clear?

>>8890074
You're trying too hard.

>>8890074
I'm sorry, you seem to have bullets confused with something else that doesn't actually exist.
People survive being shot all the time. My step-cousin accidentally shot his roommate last week and his roommate is in pretty good shape.

>>8890451
A friend of mine got shot in the stomach a few years back with a .38. The exit wound was a fucking mess and he spent some good time in the hospital, but he's perfectly fine from it.

Now he uses the scar and some lies to get chicks. He tells them that a man pulled a gun on his mother, so he tackled the guy. What actually happened was he was posing for a picture with the gun he kept in his car while we were out drinking.

Drinking and firearms are more dangerous than any bear.

>>8890718
More dangerous than a drunk bear with a fire arm?

>>8890744
And by fire arm, I mean an arm made out of fire, not a gun.

As I said before:

Hand Crossbow: Pistol
Crossbow: Musket
Superior Crossbow: Rifle
Repeating Crossbow: Revolver Rifle

Yay, magic crossbows.

>>8890744
>>8890753
Most certainly, my good man.

>>8890900
I second this.

Crossbows were such devastating weapons that the Pope outlawed them at one point.

Guns and crossbows do very similar damage. Guns are just cheaper and easier to maintain.

>Crossbows were such devastating weapons that the Pope outlawed them at one point.

Newsflash: He outlawed slings and bows too, but that usually does not fit into the worldview of technical progress-whores.

>>8892316
That's because those, too, are extremely devastating weapons.