Blunderbuss

[Jim Kane]

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

Certainly there is spread in any shotgun-type blast, but not more than a hex's worth, right?

Well... that depends entirely on the shotgun design itself, what is being fired out of it, and the distance the ammo travels, spread pattern, etc., but for TFT, it's determined specifically by how YOU envision the standard design and operational qualities of a Blunderbuss for Cidri and then stated as rule for TFT.

My question was less about ballistics, but more about seeking design clarification as to why you are electing to remove the "Street Sweeper" conical effect pattern in favor of the straight-line effect pattern.

Additionally, would you please clarify your intention here: “rolls to miss”.

Are you saying:

A) Everyone in the line-of-fire is potentially subject to the indiscriminate blast unless a figure is determined to have escaped the path of the projectiles fired by random "roll to miss" chance?

OR

B) A figure who is firing the weapon can discriminate and elect to "roll to miss" his friends in the line-of-fire, ala' other Missile and Thrown Weapons?

OR

Both, or something else?

Thanks STEVE.

JK

[Rick_Smith]

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

...

Certainly there is spread in any shotgun-type blast, but not more than a hex's worth, right?

Arquebus fired from stand: Hmm. No bonus, really?

Hi Everyone, Steve.

Re shotgun blast patterns:
I was tempted to say that the blast pattern was one hex wide for the first 5 hexes, than three hexes wide for the remaining 5 hexes of range. But to simplify, I suggested a one hex wide blast pattern, and a Megahex at the end of 9 hexes. I was not terribly comfortable with Gunpowder weapons in TFT in the first place, so I am very reluctant to make the rules complex.

Re: Accuracy of Gunpowder weapons:
I've been reading Bernard Cornwall's excellent Richard Sharpe series about a British officer who fought in India and then against Napoleon. He was fighting with the Baker rifle, but his opponents had muskets. (Note that the muskets are more advanced fire arms than the Arquebuses in TFT.)

The smooth bore weapons were so inaccurate that over 50 paces you were basically in no danger from one. You wanted a company of, say, 100 weapons firing at once to have a chance of getting some hits. At under 10 yards, muskets were likely to hit if fired by a competent user at your center of mass. This is far less accurate than a sling, bow, or crossbow.

Further, all other talents say that you are at -4 DX if you do not have the talent, and +0 DX once you master the basic competency of the skill. Why does Guns talent alone give you -4 DX if you do not have the talent, and +4 DX if you do? Especially given that the smooth bore weapons are notoriously inaccurate?

Finally, if you have a crossbow with a support, you get +2 DX. If you DO allow the gun user to set up a rod to hold the heavy barrel up, and then count that as a supported weapon, shouldn't he get at best a +2 DX for that support? Why not have one DX adjustment rather than two? But if you were keen to keep that DX adjustment, I would suggest that the gun user has to spend an extra turn or two to gain it.

And from a game design perspective the Arquebus is a no-minimum-ST weapon. You could fire it with a ST 4 kobold. Do you really want that kobold doing 3d+3 damage and getting +4 DX to boot???

***

One way to suggest the inaccuracy of these primitive guns would be to say that the Missile Weapons talent does not work with them.

***
Let us consider this scenario with the current rules:

Goblins are a low attributes race, that they typically field armies with double the manpower of human troops, let us say.

Consider a goblin army with: ST 5, DX 12, IQ 9, Talents: Guns, Missile Weapons & Knife. These guys will be firing a mass of 3d+3 bullets with an adjusted DX of 19. First rank fires. Second rank waits to see who survives and is ready to pick off the survivors. Do you want to face that?

Now you might argue, "a few guys in my army are still alive, maybe. it will take the goblins forever to reload." Sure, but they drop the guns, pull out daggers and charge your handful of wounded survivors.

The rules as written do not seem to be balanced.

Warm regards, Rick.

[larsdangly]

My general thought is that its fine to fiddle around with the details of Blunderbuss rules, so long as the weapon stays in the game and it remains a fun 'event' when one of these things goes off in the middle of a fight. Blackpowder guns add a special flavor to TFT.

If I were trying to create blunderbuss rules from scratch, I'd just translate the ones from Boot Hill into TFT stats. Boot Hill is a great tactical gun fighting engine, and its shotgun rules have always felt like the get things about right. Perhaps the rate of scatter is a a bit wider than is realistic, but its not bananas, and makes it feel like a special kind of weapon, which is fun.

[pyratejohn]

Spinning this blunderbuss rule around in my head... and thus far, I like it.

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

Certainly there is spread in any shotgun-type blast, but not more than a hex's worth, right?

I'd say so. As someone who has fired a blunderbuss often, the main plus in my book is that the bell-shaped muzzle really makes the thing easy to load.

Arquebus fired from stand: Hmm. No bonus, really?

I think I'd go in the opposite direction. Designed to be used with a stand, used without it reduces the user's adjDX by... -2?

[Tolenkar]

Steve,
I like the new change to the Blunderbuss rules. The current ones are a bit OP and never felt right to me. I'll have to try them out in a little battle today. I want to see how they would play.

On the general topic of gun powder weapons in TFT:
It can be a point of min/max for those players that do that, and those GMs that allow it to happen. I do think they add flavor and had a character once that had a blunderbuss in a campaign. But, we quickly found that powder weapons disrupted the "flavor" of a medieval style fantasy world. Our GM started to severely limit the existence of gun powder, so my character eventually just threw away the blunderbuss.

The main problem that the GM had, was not necessarily with the guns, it was with the gun powder. When we got our hands on some gun powder, it was much more effective to make petards and grenades, or other explosive contraptions, than to use it in guns. So, to make guns work, you have to severely limit GP, making it frustrating for characters built around them: as I think it should be.

On the topic of the Missile weapons Talent:
I always felt that this was a strange generalized talent. It just seems unrealistic to assume that if a person is good with a bow, that would also be good with a crossbow, or even less realistic, a slingshot! Having used bows, slings, and guns, I have found that mastery for each is separate. Even among bows there is a huge difference. Mastering a longbow is much more complicated than a re-curve bow.

I would like to see the Missile Weapons talent cost a little less (maybe 2 pts), but be specific to one weapon sub-category (sling, horse bow, longbow etc...). I'd be curious about what people thought of that idea?

Respectfuly,
Tolenkar

[meteoricshipyards]

Originally Posted by David L Pulver

I like that better than the original version.

A minor thought this raised: Should it be harder to roll to miss a multi-hex foe like a 7-hex dragon? (Perhaps left to advanced melee, but both "unless one of you is flying, you always hit them" might be a simple tweak.)

For a multi hex figure, you roll to miss every hex in the line of fire. So a 7 hex dragon might need 3-4 "to miss" rolls.

Sorry, Felkor!

[Chris Rice]

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

One thing I have learned over the past decades is that the "blunderbuss" that I was trying to represent was a comic-book version. They don't really fire a hugely spread pattern, and they don't have to kick like two mules.

New Blunderbuss draft:

The blunderbuss is a crude shotgun. It is a missile weapon, with a maximum range of 10 hexes. The roll to hit with the blunderbuss is at DX+2. All “rolls to miss” with the blunderbuss, against figures both in front of and behind the intended target, are at -2.
The blunderbuss does 1d+2 damage to the first figure it hits, and 1d-2 to everyone else it hits.
Even when you hit something with the blunderbuss, continue to make rolls to miss or hit all other figures in a straight line out to 10 hexes.

Actually, I like the Blunderbuss rules as they are. As you say, they have that comic-book feel. I'd rather we didn't get too realistic. I feel the same about the Peculiar Weapons rules.

[pyratejohn]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

Actually, I like the Blunderbuss rules as they are. As you say, they have that comic-book feel. I'd rather we didn't get too realistic. I feel the same about the Peculiar Weapons rules.

I'm sort of in the middle. I prefer the new over the old, but I'd rather not get into the weeds like we did in the GURPS Low Tech playtest.

Addendum: I am extraordinarily happy with the work we did on the black powder rules in GURPS Low Tech, and I believe they are some of the best out there, but GURPS and TFT are different creatures, and where GURPS can handle 'These go to 11', I think TFT works best with the dial at a lower setting.

[Tolenkar]

Originally Posted by pyratejohn

I think TFT works best with the dial at a lower setting.

Well said! I think it is easy to go overboard on the changes... especially when you have 38 years of ideas brewing in so many heads. The trick will be to strike that balance. Thanks for the reminder.

Respectfully,
Tolenkar

[KevinJ]

One thing people seem to be forgetting is that the 18th century Blunderbuss is not a 20th century shotgun. I have my share of shotgun experience (which includes being shot with a shotgun). While we don't need GURPS level authenticity and complexity in TFT, we do need rules that reflect how they are used and the damage they do to flesh based on the projectiles and overall technology being used to make them.

I think both versions (max range 10 and 4 people take damage) would work overall, but there that really depends on the GM.

And lets face it, people are going to House Rule TFT to better suit their current house ruled version no matter how well written and comprehemsive the rules are.