[3e] Flintlock Design Questions

[Phaelen Bleux]

OK, as the GM Who Over-Prepares Everything I am working on expanding the types of flintlocks available from HT, using the gun design rules in Vehicles. I started with pistols, so that I could compare to the entries in HT. A couple of discrepancies I have run into:

The Max damage range is about twice from my designed guns as for the ones in HT. In fact, the Vehicles calc does not work for the HT guns. Why?

The cost of the pistols is also very different. . .

From a more general standpoint, are snub-nosed pistols historically available?

Lastly, I was planning on designing carbines as short-barreled, normal powered, rifled stock grip weapons, and blunderbusses as short-barreled, low-powered, smoothbore stock grip weapons (since the only HT blunderbuss is listed as a shotgun). Does this seem legitimate?

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Phaelen Bleux

Lastly, I was planning on designing carbines as short-barreled, normal powered, rifled stock grip weapons, ?

You will likely get bad numbers for any black powder weapon rated as normal power with the possible exception of cannons. Use low power.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Phaelen Bleux

The Max damage range is about twice from my designed guns as for the ones in HT. In fact, the Vehicles calc does not work for the HT guns. Why?

HT originally came out a decade before VE2, so I'm not surprised there are some differences.

Either HT authors had bad info on the maximum range of black-powder weapons or VE2 was overly optimistic.

The cost of the pistols is also very different. . .

I wouldn't worry about this. Just as well to use VE2 cost formula if historical cost is unavailable.

From a more general standpoint, are snub-nosed pistols historically available?

Possibly. I want to say I've seen a photo of one but ...

Lastly, I was planning on designing carbines as short-barreled, normal powered, rifled stock grip weapons, and blunderbusses as short-barreled, low-powered, smoothbore stock grip weapons (since the only HT blunderbuss is listed as a shotgun). Does this seem legitimate?

I agree with Fred. Make black-powder small arms should be low powered. Blunderbuss is probably extremely short barrel.

[Phaelen Bleux]

Originally Posted by copeab

I agree with Fred. Make black-powder small arms should be low powered. Blunderbuss is probably extremely short barrel.

Extremely short barrel is for snub nosed pistols, and very short for pistols. So it seemed to me that blunderbusses should be one more size up.

But, maybe carbines could be pistol-length barrels with rifling and a stock?? Or should they go up one size too?

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Phaelen Bleux

Extremely short barrel is for snub nosed pistols, and very short for pistols. So it seemed to me that blunderbusses should be one more size up.

The barrel length categories are relative to bore size. For example, a mortar barrel is much longer than a pistol barrel, but is usually extremely short or very short.

The blunderbuss barrel is quite short relative to it's bore.

See the sidebar on p.VE99.

But, maybe carbines could be pistol-length barrels with rifling and a stock?? Or should they go up one size too?

I would go with medium barrels for carbines and long barrels for rifles. Muskets can be medium or long.

[Phaelen Bleux]

How's this for design nomenclature?:

Pistolet: Extremely short barrel, pistol grip, smoothbore, 10-19mm caliber
Pistol: Very short barrel, pistol grip, smoothbore, 10-19mm caliber
Blunderbuss: Very short barrel, stock grip, smoothbore, 25-63mm caliber
Carbine: Short barrel, stock grip, rifled, 12-22mm caliber
Musketoon: Short barrel, stock grip, smoothbore, 25-63mm caliber
Musket: Medium barrel, stock grip, smoothbore, 12-22mm caliber

All are low power.

From what I can tell, Long barrels are for TL6+ rifles. Longer-barrels muskets are "medium" (p. VE102).

Also, does anyone know who (and when) used "Bore" to name guns sizes. . .like 8-bore rather than .835 or 21mm.

[pieclone]

Originally Posted by Phaelen Bleux

Also, does anyone know who (and when) used "Bore" to name guns sizes. . .like 8-bore rather than .835 or 21mm.

Etymonline states that bore relating to "diameter of a tube" is from the late 16thC. Rating in mm would be "unlikely" prior to the introduction of the metric system in 1791 so we're looking at a period of a couple of hundred years. The bore system is different from the gauge system - bore measures how many spherical projectiles fitting in the barrel would weigh 1lb i.e. 4-bore is 1/4lb projectile.

There's a decent bore to gauge conversion table on wikipedia that might be of use to you as well. Wiki also states that the use of "bore" for describing projectile size was English in origin. I can't narrow down the time frame further as I'm at work and they kind of frown on me looking up BP weapons on their dime...

[Phaelen Bleux]

Originally Posted by Phaelen Bleux

How's this for design nomenclature?:

Pistolet: Extremely short barrel, pistol grip, smoothbore, 10-19mm caliber
Pistol: Very short barrel, pistol grip, smoothbore, 10-19mm caliber
Blunderbuss: Very short barrel, stock grip, smoothbore, 25-63mm caliber
Carbine: Short barrel, stock grip, rifled, 12-22mm caliber
Musketoon: Short barrel, stock grip, smoothbore, 25-63mm caliber
Musket: Medium barrel, stock grip, smoothbore, 12-22mm caliber

All are low power.

From what I can tell, Long barrels are for TL6+ rifles. Longer-barrels muskets are "medium" (p. VE102).

Just to follow up, all of the weapons fell out pretty well as described above, with a few caveats:

Blunderbusses actually have a short barrel by the caliber system on p. VE99.
Damage for the VE design blunderbuss is much lower than in HT. . .3d vs. 5d.

I think the prices for the pistols I mentioned in the OP are high because they are usually Fine Quality in HT. Prices for other guns lined up pretty well.

Thanks for the help; the low-power tip was especially critical.