[DF] I can haz gunpowderz?

[Langy]

I don't trust the Basic Set stats - they're too good compared to the High Tech stats for pistols one TL in advance (as in, they're better in nearly every way compared to the TL5 flintlock-type pistols). Same with the flintlock musket. Either they screwed up the stats or the TL (or the TL5 weapons are woefully underpowered for their TL).

Still, good to see that there are stats for TL4 firearms. I completely forgot about the Basic Set:/

[Zed]

Since this thread is [DF], let me pose the question:

Why would it matter if a pistol is 2d or 20d as long as there was some cinematic/fantasy justification for it?

A character using guns is as much a gimick/schtick in DF as bards using music or barbarians using big 2-hand weapons. It's another variant of Awesome each DF character possesses. Think of it like pro-wrestling. A move might look cool/ghastly/painful, but doesn't actually harm anyone... in fact the whole point is it looks awesome to the audience.

~Z

[Langy]

Originally Posted by Zed

Why would it matter if a pistol is 2d or 20d as long as there was some cinematic/fantasy justification for it?

Game balance. It wouldn't be fair to all the other players if there was one character with 20d damage pistols able to fire at RoF 10 with infinite ammunition and an Acc of 6 - everyone else is stuck with much less damaging/easy-to-use/accurate attacks.

[Zed]

Originally Posted by Langy

Game balance. It wouldn't be fair to all the other players if there was one character with 20d damage pistols able to fire at RoF 10 with infinite ammunition and an Acc of 6 - everyone else is stuck with much less damaging/easy-to-use/accurate attacks.

You can balance a game around the cinematic/fantasy justifications for having capability x, y z more easily then around realism and historical accuracy. That 20d ac 6, RoF 10 weapon/power could be anything... a self powered wand of obliteration for wizards, a sword of shooting fiery death for melee, or a bamboo shoulder fired Gatling gadget auto-cannon of doom for ninjas.

Its all schtick/gimmick _what_ the method is, the stats are there to keep it fair within the game... balancing versus realism/historical accuracy would actually make things harder to balance and possibly quite unfair (because real life isn't game balanced)

I'm saying if everyone in the game has there schtick or gimmick of dispensing doom that is +/- 10% equal, but looks and sounds different - to me that is easier to game balance then somehow to shoe-horn realism and historical accuracy, especially in a high cinema/fantasy genre.

[Langy]

I don't think anybody is mentioning realism or historical considerations for why guns should/should not be in DF. It's pretty much strictly a question of balance and 'does this fit the genre?' In general, the answer to 'does this fit the genre?' is 'yes, it fits in some of the source material, but note that it doesn't fit in all of it'. Everything else is a question of balance, which is why I said I'd allow some TL5+ weaponry in DF but not others. I would never allow an assault rifle in DF, but I might some kind of olde-timey flavored shotgunney thing, or a multi-barreled pistol, or whatever.

But the question you asked is why it matters whether the pistol does 2d or 20d damage. The answer is 'game balance', because we've already got character templates that are mostly balanced around 1d-4d of damage possible, with some higher-damage things being vaguely possible for super-powered people, but even they have some serious drawbacks. A weapon that's super-accurate, super-powerful, super-easy-to-use, and shoots super-fast and otherwise has no weaknesses would unbalance the game, which is why 'does it do 2d or 20d damage' is a valid question. We already know what all the *other* templates and equipment are capable of - any gunpowder weapons should be vaguely within that 'balance box'.

[Zed]

Maybe I read realism/historical accuracy into posts I shouldn't have. Sorry :)
I grock the later portion of the thread better now.

[Atreyu_Hibiki]

Try this: calculate how many points the average crossbow or bow would be as an innate attack. Then build a few guns to that point cost, using reload times, etc. to balance it out. That should solve any questions of game balance. Personally, I'd have no problems with having one gun that can be fired several rounds in a row but have crappy damage, one that's got medium size and range, a blunderbuss that "grape-shots", and a hand-cannon that's only good once in a battle and takes minutes or an hour to reload.

[combatmedic]

Originally Posted by Atreyu_Hibiki

Try this: calculate how many points the average crossbow or bow would be as an innate attack. Then build a few guns to that point cost, using reload times, etc. to balance it out. That should solve any questions of game balance. Personally, I'd have no problems with having one gun that can be fired several rounds in a row but have crappy damage, one that's got medium size and range, a blunderbuss that "grape-shots", and a hand-cannon that's only good once in a battle and takes minutes or an hour to reload.

What takes an hour to reload? I cannot think of anything that slow.
Minutes? Maybe for an untrained user with a matchlock arquebus.

GURPS rounds are about 1 second long, so even a trained soldier who can load and fire his flintlock musket six times in a minute is still much slower than an archer. Of course, he's not racking up fatigue drawing a bow. :)

The advantages of early firearms do not lie in RoF, but in ease of use/training, cheapness, and efficiency of massed fire on the battlefield.

Guns can easily appear alongside armor, melee weapons, and even bows and crossbows. They did so in the real world for quite some time.

The armament that works best for a small team of highly skilled killers may be different from what works best for equipping armies.

I'm probably thinking in a very un-DF way, though . :0 Plausibility isn't exactly the goal, is it?

[SuedodeuS]

Originally Posted by Atreyu_Hibiki

Try this: calculate how many points the average crossbow or bow would be as an innate attack. Then build a few guns to that point cost, using reload times, etc. to balance it out. That should solve any questions of game balance. Personally, I'd have no problems with having one gun that can be fired several rounds in a row but have crappy damage, one that's got medium size and range, a blunderbuss that "grape-shots", and a hand-cannon that's only good once in a battle and takes minutes or an hour to reload.

We'll assume an ST 16 composite bow to be "average" (Scout has starting ST of 13, can optionally buy +1 or +2 to ST, and likely has the Strongbow Perk). That's 1d+4 (call it 2d) imp, Acc 3, Range 320/400, RoF 1, Shots 1(2). So, that's Innate Attack 2d imp, Increased Range 50x/5x (+25%/+10%), and Limited Uses 1 (Very Fast Reload* , -10%). End cost is [20]. It should also have Low Signature (+10%) for [21.6], rounding up to [22].

The matchlock musket from Basic Set is 4d pi++, Acc 2, Range 100/600, RoF 1, Shots 1(60). That's Innate Attack 4d pi++, Reduced Accuracy 1 (-5%), Increased Range 10x/5x (we'll give it a break and drop it to max 500; +15%/+10%), and Limited Uses 1 (Slow Reload**, -35%). The end cost is [27.2], rounded up to [28]. The cloud of smoke might work as a Nuisance Effect (-5%), dropping it down to [25.6], rounded up to [26]. Thus, we would need to nerf the musket to balance it in this way - and personally, I think making it still worse would make nobody bother to use it.
Well, I guess it would depend on how you balanced it. Making it pi instead of pi++ and keeping the rest the same drops the cost to [16], meaning we could afford to bump up the damage a bit and/or make some more improvements. Were we to drop the reload time down to the minimum required for the Limitation we've taken (6 seconds), I think it would be a rather overpowered weapon. Thus, I don't think the GURPS trait system is a good way to make "balanced" equipment. In fact, I'd say for a setting like DF, many of the Limitations for taking longer to use an ability don't give enough of a discount if you're using them to build an attack.

*Fast Reload takes 3-5 seconds and is half cost, I figure Very Fast Reload would take 1-2 and be 1/4 cost.
**Note slow reload on an Innate Attack costs the same regardless of if it takes 6 seconds of 60 seconds; I considered Preparation Required, but that's actually worth less of a discount.

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by SuedodeuS

We'll assume an ST 16 composite bow to be "average" (Scout has starting ST of 13, can optionally buy +1 or +2 to ST, and likely has the Strongbow Perk). That's 1d+4 (call it 2d) imp, Acc 3, Range 320/400, RoF 1, Shots 1(2). So, that's Innate Attack 2d imp, Increased Range 50x/5x (+25%/+10%), and Limited Uses 1 (Very Fast Reload* , -10%). End cost is [20]. It should also have Low Signature (+10%) for [21.6], rounding up to [22].

The matchlock musket from Basic Set is 4d pi++, Acc 2, Range 100/600, RoF 1, Shots 1(60). That's Innate Attack 4d pi++, Reduced Accuracy 1 (-5%), Increased Range 10x/5x (we'll give it a break and drop it to max 500; +15%/+10%), and Limited Uses 1 (Slow Reload**, -35%). The end cost is [27.2], rounded up to [28]. The cloud of smoke might work as a Nuisance Effect (-5%), dropping it down to [25.6], rounded up to [26]. Thus, we would need to nerf the musket to balance it in this way - and personally, I think making it still worse would make nobody bother to use it.
Well, I guess it would depend on how you balanced it. Making it pi instead of pi++ and keeping the rest the same drops the cost to [16], meaning we could afford to bump up the damage a bit and/or make some more improvements. Were we to drop the reload time down to the minimum required for the Limitation we've taken (6 seconds), I think it would be a rather overpowered weapon. Thus, I don't think the GURPS trait system is a good way to make "balanced" equipment. In fact, I'd say for a setting like DF, many of the Limitations for taking longer to use an ability don't give enough of a discount if you're using them to build an attack.

If you have to worry about weight is it comparable to a couple of crossbows that use a goats foot and the strongest PC to manage. Sure that is likely around 2d+4 imp, but you can carry twice as many crossbows. So it seems fairly balanced, you lose some damage for twice as many shots per encounter.

So I don't think that IA level is the be all and end all of these debates. IA level does not factor in weight.