Black Powder Rules

[Irving the Meek]

Black powder gets some slightly unrealistic rules under d20. Thought I'd share some possible house rules to fix some percieved incongruities.

Even as a full-round action, it's absurdly fast to load a blackpowder gun at that speed. As an alternative, reloading a blackpowder gun requires a craft (gunsmith) check of DC 15 - failure means the gun is fouled and cannot be used until properly cleaned out (a ten-minute process.) Players should want to take 10 or even 20 with this check, so maybe a higher DC is called for.

As a counterbalance, however, it's quite easy to make bullets for a blackpowder gun - a Craft (blackpowder) DC of 10. Making bullets out of unusual materials to get around immunity should be fairly simple - a musket should be a monster-hunter's tool of choice once you know its weakness.

More ideas in a bit.

[Malus Black]

Yes, the rules for blackpowder weapons are somewhat unrealistic, but they work and they are balanced. The high damage output of blackpowder weapons is already offset by the high cost, reliance on blackpowder, high CLs and, yes, long reloading times. Remember, rapid reload doesn't apply to blackpowder weapons, denying higher-level characters the important iterative attacks.

The bottom line is that, yes, you can tinker with the rules to make them more realistic (and your suggestion is fairly moderate compared to some of the others I've seen around the net). But the question is, what will it add to the game? If your players enjoy more realism, go for it. But as it stands now, I just can't see someone using the bunch of feats and skillpoints neccessary to become a decent blackpowder weapon-using fighter with this hanging over them, when they could just get a crossbow and rapid reload.

[Kel-nage]

Players should want to take 10 or even 20 with this check, so maybe a higher DC is called for.

I just wanted to say - if a player is reloading a weapon, that'll probably mean they've got a reason to (i.e. they are being attacked). So, by the rules, they can't take 20 in that situation. And in fact, you could easily rule that taking 10 would take between 3-4 rounds or longer - far too long for a fast-paced combat.

[Malus Black]

Players should want to take 10 or even 20 with this check, so maybe a higher DC is called for.

I just wanted to say - if a player is reloading a weapon, that'll probably mean they've got a reason to (i.e. they are being attacked). So, by the rules, they can't take 20 in that situation. And in fact, you could easily rule that taking 10 would take between 3-4 rounds or longer - far too long for a fast-paced combat.

Aye, that's what I was getting at at the end there; no one is going to take three or four rounds to reload their musket. No one. Not only would they be more useful if they just charged into battle bludgeoning their enemies, I assume they'd also have to make concentration checks if damaged while reloading to avoid losing that round.

What this means is that anyone even considering using blackpowder weapons will put a lot of effort into getting a high Craft (Gunsmith) modifier. Not that this is very hard, as a first level character easily could have a +10 modifier (+4 ranks, +3 stat modifier, +3 skill focus). Hence, you'd have to up the DC to make it stay a viable drawback. And what this means is that a single bad roll in the heat of combat could make that musket-wielding fighter who's spent feats, skill points, money and possibly even a prestige class on being a decent shot, into a thug with an expensive club. As I said, you'd have an awful lot of people buying crossbows.

[Irving the Meek]

Well, the idea implicit behind the very slow reload time is that you shouldn't attempt to reload a pistol in combat, period. That's why people carried "a brace of pistols" - you fired one, holstered it, and fired the other. (If you've ever watched "Last of the Mohecans" you'll see what I mean.) A drop in the price of guns might be in order to make that more viable, come to think of it. It's very hard to carry several loaded crossbows around, but if pistols cost, say, 100 gold each, it would be eminently possible that a well-heeled fighter might carry two or three and pump out two or three shots in a row.

Obviously, that kind of trick in d20 would benefit from the Quick Draw feat. Maybe a feat that makes two-handed firing easy is in order, too, for those really exiciting times when the werewolf is at your throat...

If we're still unbalaced, a bump to the criticals or damage might be in order. We've been trained by the movies to think that a shot badguy is a dead badguy, and if you're only getting a few shots off in a combat they should be dramatic things. Maybe go to x4?

On a slightly diferent subject, bayonets also make little sense under the curent rules - a club does better damage. My suggestion is that when a bayonet is mounted on a musket, the wielder does double damage on the charge, like a lance but on foot. Brings the musket charge to life in this game, and provides a good damage option for the guy who's msuket is empty.

[Pariah]

My last character carried around 6 pistols (two on the thighs, two on the hips, two on the chest), used quick draw and the two-weapon fighting feats. However, he would never reload in combat because my GM tweaked the rules that reload times were 2 full round actions (so if I wanted another full barrage I'd be standing around for 12 rounds while my party held off all sorts evil). Even at one full round action each, it isn't combat effective to reload guns except, maybe, at first level. I definately think they need tweaking...

The full round action is...alright, I suppose. This leaves it so it's not the best idea to reload your gun in combat, but the option is still viable should you really need to shoot something with a silver bullet.

I think the damage needs to be changed, if I'm paying my life's savings for a weapon, I'd like it to be reliable. I have an extreme distaste for an elf hewing things to bits that are about ten times the height with a little sword when my bullets have the chance to deal 1 damage. I think the damage should be redone so it has a 'str' modifier of sorts, so a pistol would be d6+4 or d8+2. Even being grazed by a bullet is suppose tear of a large area of flesh as it goes with it.

My GM ruled that guns were 18-20/2 on the critical hit, and while I can see how this works, I think they should actually be x4, because it's not easy to hit a weak spot with a 1" ball, but should you hit it, it's done for.

I think the range needs an upgrade as well, not that you actually get to utilize giant ranges all that often, it's still nice to know that my 'high tech' weaponry can out range a bow.

[Irving the Meek]

Eh, dunno. The range doesn't need a boost in my opinion - blackpowder guns really can't outrange bows. The big advantage with guns over bows IRL, really, is that they take little training. (The old adage about bows is that if you want a good bowman, start by training his grandfather. Kinda explains why elves are so good with the bow - they're old enough to be their own grandfather.)

From a cinematic view, however, guns should be big, noisy, significant things. A gunshot makes a godawful noise and by all rights of drama ought to do godawful damage. As acounterbalance, gunshots should be limited in game - you've got one or two and that's it.

(Random thought - he're another possible house rule... gunshots cause all creatures with an Intelligence of 6 or less to take a Will save (DC 10) or become panicked. Training can eliminate this penalty - it must be taught as a trick.)

[ScS of the Fraternity]

Indeed, the reason that guns dominated warfare was their ease of use and logistics. Gusn should have been made into simple weapons, but since that would have made them way too common in Ravenloft, I can see why the developers opted to make it exotic.

[Waldi]

Well, I would not care, if guns would be a bit more common in Ravenloft.
That would fit a bit better into this 17-18th-century-gothic-novel-feeling the northwestern core has. Policemen in Paridon or Port-au-Lucine carring a crossbow just to cause no culture-shock to wandering adventurers from more tolkinesque countries are bit strange...

[Malus Black]

Indeed, the reason that guns dominated warfare was their ease of use and logistics. Gusn should have been made into simple weapons, but since that would have made them way too common in Ravenloft, I can see why the developers opted to make it exotic.

Aye, I think the original idea of making pistols simple weapons and muskets martial weapons in CL 8+ (I think it was) domains would have been a better idea than making them all exotic.

'Course, I think that most serious ranged combatants in Ravenloft would stick to bows or crossbows - they're silent, not reliant on gunpowder, easy to pick up just about anywhere, and so on, whereas most melee fighters would probably carry a pistol or two for that first high damage-output shot before they charge into the fray.

My last character carried around 6 pistols (two on the thighs, two on the hips, two on the chest), used quick draw and the two-weapon fighting feats.

A very viable tactic with one flaw (apart from the whole "one or two rounds' worth of full attacks, then reload" issue) - pistols are expensive, even with a price reduction, but masterwork and enchanted pistols are even more so. Staying on par with the party archers on higher levels is not going to be cheap.

[Pariah]

It wasn't, I was the party know-it-all anyway, so my role in combat was fairly minor...my damage output was easily out distanced by the crazy sorceress, the wily cleric and the fighter.

However, one class that works really well with the guns is the Scout, with their skirmish ability suddenly you no longer have to carry around a stupid amount of guns and your weapons will still hit hard. Except against, you know, ghosts...vampires...general undead and such... In Ravenloft, your head is the best weapon you have. They can say Raphael did nothing in combat, but they never would've been able to beat anything unless he told them how to fight it.

I'm not sure if it will balance it, but in my upcoming campaign I'm switching armour to have damage reduction, and I think if guns bypass this entirely that will balance them out. What do you think? Would that actually make them too powerful, or just right?

[Kessler]

Indeed, the reason that guns dominated warfare was their ease of use and logistics. Gusn should have been made into simple weapons, but since that would have made them way too common in Ravenloft, I can see why the developers opted to make it exotic.

Indeed. But the main reason they became so popular was their price which was considerably lower than for example crossbow. Making a gun was simpler-cheaper; and especially its ammunition: instead of smithing all single bolts the gunsmith simply cast lots of tin bullets.

Guns were inferior compared to crossbow for a long time: loading time was slightly longer, accuracy was bad and comparing 14th-15th century crossbow with 18th-19th century gun, the crossbow was still with better penetration power. However, guns were tremendously cheaper - which meant a lot, because in 16th century the national states started to use big permanent mercenary armies.

So IMC guns are martial weapons and very cheap - at least in reneissance domains.

[Irving the Meek]

Heh. A lot of Ravenloft can be thought of as "the boondocks" - the countries that we consider to be the big important ones (Barovia, even Darkon to a slight degree) are porbably conisdered the backwaters of Dementlieu. Civilization is a tenuous sort of thing in most places. With that in mind, it's not out of line to presume that the Rennisance domains are the exception rather than the rule, and in the bulk of Ravenloft guns are quite literally exotic weapons. Not as exotic as a katana, perhaps, but not something most warriors are familiar with. A city guard in Borca has probably heard of guns, but he's never seen one in person.

[ScS of the Fraternity]

Possibly, but also remember how easy a gun is to learn to use (unless you want to get into high persision long-distance shooting- but that's another story).
A sling, for example, is a much more difficult weapon to master - yet it is considered a simple weapon.
While a katana takes years to learn to use to its most effectiveness - a person can be deadly with a gun is a few short lessons (PS: this still doesn't inlcude long distance shooting).

[ewancummins]

We used to play Ravenloft, back in 2E days. Our group always used the rules for firearms from HR4 A Mighty Fortress[ Europe from 1550-1650]. They were detailed, and made guns worth buying. Misfires were handled nicely. Guns may have been a bit of a holy terror on armor[at close range, anyway]-but I houseruled that ''bulletproof'' plate could be bought-but it was both heavier and more expensive than the regular stuff. The stuff wasn't really bulletproof, just resistant[no special modifiers for armor penetration. The rules covered matchlocks, wheellocks,and snaphaunces[an early flintlock ].

I highly reccomend you look at GURPS High Tech, if you can get access to it. It converts easily, and has very realistic rules for all kinds of primitive firearms.