![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Join Date: May 2018
|
![]()
Survivable Guns article suggests halving the damage of some firearms and giving them AD(2) to make them less lethat. However, the article seems focused on modern firearms using jacketed ammunition.
Early firearms like muskets uses large unjacketed lead balls that are soft but expands well on impact. If I wanted to make muskets more survivable, would it be realistic if I kept its damage but added AD(0.5) on it? Well armored cuirassiers with DR9 plate could resist the average musket shot (4d+2), but an unarmored line infantry would still take lethal wounds from it. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Join Date: Jan 2014
|
![]()
Well from Wikipedia:
Quote:
Last edited by TGLS; 10-10-2019 at 09:26 AM. Reason: Brace |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
![]()
What are you trying to achieve by making gunfire survivable? There are a couple of work arounds elsewhere in the rules for cinematic conventions if that helps - things like Stormtrooper marksmanship, bulletproof nudity and something to do with HK cinema conventions about guns...
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
|
![]()
One of the things that make musket shots so dangerous is their size, which gives them pi+ or pi++ damage. If you want to emphasise armour's value, your idea of giving them AD (0.5) is a good one. If you want to simply reduce their lethality, making them do crushing or pi damage is probably more useful. Crushing makes them very effective vs zombies, so if that's something you don't want, make them pi, but note that pi attacks can target the vitals and eyes, whilst crushing can't, but crushing has better knockback and blunt trauma so choose the dame type that has the effects you most want.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn "A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history." |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
![]()
Another possibility would be to double armor DR against piercing attacks after the widespread use of firearms.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Join Date: Sep 2011
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Join Date: Nov 2015
|
![]()
I don't really see a problem with 4d6 muskets. Of course that depends on the kind of game you're running, but I hope your characters aren't getting shot by multiple muskets each round, and they even have access to DR 9 armor...
Between reload time and malfunction chances, if they have a decent chance of just bouncing off your armor, what good are they ? My players feared muskets in a pirate campaign I ran, and they were at best wearing DR 2 leather jackets and sometimes a cap. Still, it never stopped them from boarding juicy ships. Sometimes someone didn't make it, sometimes someone was dragged away and brough to the cook (who was also the ship's medic ofc), but then there was the next ship, and the next musket... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |||||||
Join Date: May 2018
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
![]()
Nope, I've checked Basic, Low Tech and High Tech and found no item with "musket" in its' name that has a 1/2D of 180 yards or longer. The earliest weapon that does is the Dreyse from the 1840s.
80 to 130 yards seems commen.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
firearms, low-tech, survivable guns |
|
|