Modified Firearm Rounds

[Nathan of the FoS]

Actually, the whole "firearms are weak" thing is pretty realistic. A longbow was at least as accurate as any firearm until the invention of the rifled barrel (mid 18th century) and had a better rate of fire than any weapon until the repeating rifles and revolvers of the mid-19th century. A longbow was just as good at penetrating armor, too.

The big advantages of muskets were a) ease of use and b) cheapness. It takes years of training to be able to handle a longbow, compared to weeks to learn to fire a musket, and muskets and lead shoot are much cheaper and quicker to make than longbows and arrows. So huge conscript armies were much easier and cheaper to arm with muskets.

And, of course, gunpowder offers the use of cannon (the real reason for the demise of heavy armor--plate mail will stop a musket ball pretty well, but not a cannonball) and pistols (small enough to be a sidearm and can be used by cavalry).

In other words, Ravenloft rules for bows vs. guns are backwards in that muskets and pistols should be cheap, simple weapons and longbows should be expensive martial or even exotic weapons--but the relative damage, armor piercing ability, and rate of fire for longbows vs. muskets are realistic as written.

[High Priest Mikhal]

Actually, the whole "firearms are weak" thing is pretty realistic. A longbow was at least as accurate as any firearm until the invention of the rifled barrel (mid 18th century) and had a better rate of fire than any weapon until the repeating rifles and revolvers of the mid-19th century. A longbow was just as good at penetrating armor, too.

Regular plate mail was actually too thin to stop a bullet or arrow. So the armorsmith made it thicker and used more expensive carbon-infused iron (steel). They would then literally shoot a suit of plate mail they made to prove it was thick enough to stop a bullet, marked by a telltale dent (this is where "bulletproof" comes into the English lexicon). The problem with such thick armor is the weight: the wearer would barely be able to move. That was another major factor in armor's demise.

I could go into the physics of ballistics, but suffice to say metal works by deflecting a blow while softer materials absorb and disperse the force. A rigid but "soft" material like metal takes all the bullet's force at point--where it's likely to tear open unless it's thick enough or angled to literally deflect the round (which wasn't feasible in personal armor). Absorbing materials like animal hides absorb the momentum and the bullet loses power, sometimes being stopped cold.

[Rotipher of the FoS]

But yeah, the muzzle loaders of RL just don't realistically allow for multiple attacks in six seconds.

That's why pirates would tie five or six loaded pistols on a string and hang it around the neck, before coming aboard a captured ship. A hero with a bandoleer of loaded pistols could plausibly make full attacks, but only for two or three rounds of combat.

BTW, do any of you guys allow for double-loading of ball-and-powder firearms? If so, how do you illustrate the effects (damage gained vs. range or accuracy lost) of stuffing more than one ball into the weapon at once?

[High Priest Mikhal]

Double-loading would render the guns unusable at best, explosive at worst. They'd either just not fire or explode when the powder was lit. If you want to increase damage, try grape shot: small lead pellets held in a container (usually wood or hollow lead balls) that would disintegrate upon firing and release a torrent of shot--an early form of buckshot. The attacks would probably be at -2 to -4 attack roll, but with +2 to +4 damage.

Doubling the powder without the bullet has the same problem: it's likely to explode when fired. Larger bore guns with stronger barrels would be needed, along with larger bullets.

[Archedius]

A big misconception about full plate is that knights couldn't move well- this is simply not true. This came about, like many other medieval misconceptions, from museum curators being to physically weak to use the armaments.

Field plate is fully articulated at the joints and allows for nearly full range of motion- knights used to train by pulling themselves up ladders without their legs while in full armor. The weight is also distributed over the body, making it easier to walk around in than you would think. (avg 60 lbs.) If someone goes to wear plate and has trouble moving- it's probably not customized to them and/or they are to weak to be wearing it.

The real reason field plate fell out of favour is cost and the need for many horses to keep the knights mobile. Plate armor is very expensive- that money could be used for more guns and ammunition. Also- knights could expect at the most one charge from their mount as the armor was so heavy for the horse (not to mention the lead flying around).

So a knight basically became an impractical investment as they required their own personalized piece of steel and many expensive horses to make use of it. Field plate would persist into the 1700's as some officers would wear it when observing the battle around them while staying relatively safe.

[JinnTolser]

The big advantages of muskets were a) ease of use and b) cheapness. It takes years of training to be able to handle a longbow, compared to weeks to learn to fire a musket, and muskets and lead shoot are much cheaper and quicker to make than longbows and arrows. So huge conscript armies were much easier and cheaper to arm with muskets.

Then if the rules are going to be based on realism (although I don't see why, since nothing else in D&D is), firearms should be considered simple weapons. Also, Samuel Colt was awarded his first revolver patent in 1835, so finding them in a CL 10 domain, should one choose to advance any domains to that level, should not be out of the question.

Anyway, I'm looking at this more from a game balance perspective than realism. What we have is a very expensive Exotic weapon that's completely not worth using as it is.

To get back on topic, specialized rounds, whether realistic or not, would be a good way to make guns not only more fun to use, but also give them a specialized niche in terms of gameplay. I don't see the harm in letting a player develop either frozen holy water pellets or hollow bullets full of holy water for use against undead, against whom the firearm's one redeeming quality (its x3 critical multiplier) is completely meaningless. So what if it's not realistic? Neither are undead in the first place.

[Rotipher of the FoS]

Double-loading would render the guns unusable at best, explosive at worst. They'd either just not fire or explode when the powder was lit.

I mean loading multiple bullets, not doubling the powder load. People really did that sometimes, at least according to the History Channel.

[High Priest Mikhal]

Ah. I kind of wondered about that. But I still think medieval steel armor that could stop a musket ball would be too heavy. Maybe not for the knight but for his horse. What good is a knight that can't charge even once? But we're getting off-topic. Back to the OP.

Also Archedius is right. That kind of weight when distributed isn't much to bear. But try focusing it on one area--like the back. Anyone who went through BT knows what that's like.

[Archedius]

Mikhal, you've got it: ) The warhorses, the purebred, well-fed, groomed, trained, warhorses could only get one charge with a knight in full field plate. That's if the horses weren't injured or killed. Knights were alright dismounted, but eventually were at the mercy of being kept at bay by pikes/polearms. There's also the multitude of picks, maces and even clubs that were effective against plate.

It must be said though that once a knight was knocked on his back...well it's rather fun to try and stand up in the chaos of battle with no weight on you- let alone full field plate! Such occurences led to many ransom opportunities as a felled knight could quickly have a mercy dagger put in his helms eye-holes and be forced to surrender.

Even with all of the advances in firearms- many times crossbows could still breach field plate at close range. Arrows not so much (not enough force, not the right materials)- but crossbows could.

The whole point of gunpowder was that it gradually shifted the focus from cavalry and archers to the infantrymen. Once you could cheaply outfit infantry with pikes and muskets, everything else became either ancillary or cost-ineffective. As you guys said before, archers were phased out.

As for making this reflected by the rules... Needless to say I've houseruled a LOT : ) At some point I may type up and post my houserules for 3.5 edition RL to see if anyone else has cool ideas I might pillage: )

The cool thing is that Ravenloft really does capture this whole transition period well. It adds a great deal of depth to the setting. Where else can you go from classical, early medieval, rennaissance all the way to romantic periods?

[Rotipher of the FoS]

Where else can you go from classical, early medieval, rennaissance all the way to romantic periods?

The historical real world springs to mind, but you'd have to visit a lot of different countries and continents to see them all existing simultaneously.

[High Priest Mikhal]

I mean loading multiple bullets, not doubling the powder load. People really did that sometimes, at least according to the History Channel.

I'm not sure. I'll have to look into it. I know of chain shot for artillery that kind of fits "two rounds in one shot," but nothing for muskets or pistols.

[ewancummins]

I consider firearms,cannon, grenades,etc to be simple or martial weapons, never exotic.

[Archedius]

Ewancummings, I fully agree with that- one of my houserules: )

As for double-loading, I've heard of it but in the context of an early form of buckshot. You could double load by throwing more than one musket ball in- but you'd better be prepared for a very ineffective and possibly dangerous shot: )

[Rotipher of the FoS]

That's what I was wondering: just how much would it penalize range and accuracy, and how much might it enhance damage to compensate?

For that matter, how (if at all) would you modify the stats for a cannon or blunderbuss, if it's stuffed with scrounged odds and ends of metal rather than proper shot?

[ewancummins]

Buck and ball, baby!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_and_ball