The concept behind it for an Artificer is very interesting and fun, but gameplay wise, it just seems like a massive hinderance. 30/90ft or 40/120ft range. Would need to take sharpshooter to not always be at disadvantage, due to distance and unless you start with it immediately, down the line, firebolt becomes much better in the end, just by lv 5. Though it is single target vs two targets.
Has anyone find some way to make it more gameplay worthy, or is this really for basically story concept only?
I am assuming you are refering to the Renaissance Pistol and Musket from DMG due to the base range you mention.
So, I think they work very well conceptively and mechanically. In gameplay, they're pretty much the same as a hand and a light crossbow, with a bit of less range (more discrepant for the musket) but with a d10 or a d12 damage (which is a big deal in 5e).
About firebolt is the same if we compare it to any other weapon in the game: it depends whether a character is better (or prefer) wepons or spells or which one fits better at the moment.
Yea, I'm pretty sure my group wont allow multi-shot guns in the adventure. At least not at first, lol. Maybe once I get my hands on one, spend good amount of time with it. I can request towards being able to have multi-shot guns (more than just 1d anything).
Yea, I thought it through a bit more. Just means I wont be a long range type person, but a well armored in the face one with the pistol at least. Will need to think a bit for mustket/rifle.
I am assuming you are refering to the Renaissance Pistol and Musket from DMG due to the base range you mention.
So, I think they work very well conceptively and mechanically. In gameplay, they're pretty much the same as a hand and a light crossbow, with a bit of less range (more discrepant for the musket) but with a d10 or a d12 damage (which is a big deal in 5e).
About firebolt is the same if we compare it to any other weapon in the game: it depends whether a character is better (or prefer) wepons or spells or which one fits better at the moment.
Honestly? I would argue they are worse than crossbows. They make a big ol' bang. Though as I am re-reading the firearms section, it does not actually state anything about noise. No RAW, but perhaps RAI due to the nature of them? Minmaxing would say to take the crossbow for potential stealth stuff over spell usage anyway. Outside of story or thematic purposes, I would argue you should probably avoid guns.
That said, I absolutely have a character ready that uses firearms simply because it is thematic and backstory related (my group is very lenient though).
Have you considered reimagining your wand as a gun and simply firing your fire bolt thru it? If you want two shots use two weapon fighting and 2 wands and be a “ two gun desperado”
Have you considered reimagining your wand as a gun and simply firing your fire bolt thru it? If you want two shots use two weapon fighting and 2 wands and be a “ two gun desperado”
Two weapon fighting doesn't work like this. It is only for Light Melee Weapons. Magic as a whole is very strict to one spell a turn used, unless otherwise stated on the spell or class. So shooting double firebolt in any round is probably never possible for majority of magic users. Unless you use Haste possibly? Or twinspell it? But you are just burning more to do that, makes it not worth it. Though good train of thought nonetheless.
I am assuming you are refering to the Renaissance Pistol and Musket from DMG due to the base range you mention.
So, I think they work very well conceptively and mechanically. In gameplay, they're pretty much the same as a hand and a light crossbow, with a bit of less range (more discrepant for the musket) but with a d10 or a d12 damage (which is a big deal in 5e).
About firebolt is the same if we compare it to any other weapon in the game: it depends whether a character is better (or prefer) wepons or spells or which one fits better at the moment.
Honestly? I would argue they are worse than crossbows. They make a big ol' bang. Though as I am re-reading the firearms section, it does not actually state anything about noise. No RAW, but perhaps RAI due to the nature of them? Minmaxing would say to take the crossbow for potential stealth stuff over spell usage anyway. Outside of story or thematic purposes, I would argue you should probably avoid guns.
That said, I absolutely have a character ready that uses firearms simply because it is thematic and backstory related (my group is very lenient though).
I wouldn't ever be the stealthing character (Battlesmith), so that isn't really something I worry about, but I did think about that as well. At first, I don't see the DM using the "sound" of my gun above any other general noise produced during combat (Yelling, Clanging of metals, etc).
In strictly mechanical terms, there's little practical benefit to firearms. Light and heavy crossbows are only a single damage step behind pistols and muskets, and each crossbow grade has more than twice the range of the equivalent firearm. Ammunition for crossbows is vastly easier to procure than ammunition for firearms, as are replacement crossbows. A pistol with the Repeating Shot infusion can (theoretically, with DM approval) be used alongside a shield...but so can a hand crossbow, and the handbow allows access to outrageously busted Crossbow Expert cheese.
The DMG blackpowder firearms are actively godawful, likely to try and dissuade players from obtaining/using them. They're extremely, implausibly terrible, which is a shame because being on the forefront of firearms technology in one's world is cool. The artificer is easily the best user of firearms given the existence of Repeating Shot to unhook the weapons from their ammunition issues, but Repeating Shot works just as well on any other weapon, too.
As a Battlesmith, Repeating Shot on a heavy crossbow gives you a nice blend of punch and range, as well as plenty of room for an awesome steampunk autobow. Repeating Shot on firearms can certainly work, but there's not much mechanical reason to do it if your character isn't a firearms nut.
I am assuming you are refering to the Renaissance Pistol and Musket from DMG due to the base range you mention.
So, I think they work very well conceptively and mechanically. In gameplay, they're pretty much the same as a hand and a light crossbow, with a bit of less range (more discrepant for the musket) but with a d10 or a d12 damage (which is a big deal in 5e).
About firebolt is the same if we compare it to any other weapon in the game: it depends whether a character is better (or prefer) wepons or spells or which one fits better at the moment.
Honestly? I would argue they are worse than crossbows. They make a big ol' bang. Though as I am re-reading the firearms section, it does not actually state anything about noise. No RAW, but perhaps RAI due to the nature of them? Minmaxing would say to take the crossbow for potential stealth stuff over spell usage anyway. Outside of story or thematic purposes, I would argue you should probably avoid guns.
That said, I absolutely have a character ready that uses firearms simply because it is thematic and backstory related (my group is very lenient though).
I wouldn't ever be the stealthing character (Battlesmith), so that isn't really something I worry about, but I did think about that as well. At first, I don't see the DM using the "sound" of my gun above any other general noise produced during combat (Yelling, Clanging of metals, etc).
Not being the stealthing character and not being put into a stealth situation are two different matters. I'm on the side of "having it, but not needing it", but your choice is your own.
I am assuming you are refering to the Renaissance Pistol and Musket from DMG due to the base range you mention.
So, I think they work very well conceptively and mechanically. In gameplay, they're pretty much the same as a hand and a light crossbow, with a bit of less range (more discrepant for the musket) but with a d10 or a d12 damage (which is a big deal in 5e).
About firebolt is the same if we compare it to any other weapon in the game: it depends whether a character is better (or prefer) wepons or spells or which one fits better at the moment.
Honestly? I would argue they are worse than crossbows. They make a big ol' bang. Though as I am re-reading the firearms section, it does not actually state anything about noise. No RAW, but perhaps RAI due to the nature of them? Minmaxing would say to take the crossbow for potential stealth stuff over spell usage anyway. Outside of story or thematic purposes, I would argue you should probably avoid guns.
That said, I absolutely have a character ready that uses firearms simply because it is thematic and backstory related (my group is very lenient though).
Sure, but here we have a creteria we havn't before: stealthness.
So I do agree that crossbows are better in those situations, but beyond that, I still argue that firearms have both mechanical an theme porpouses on being choosen. I mean, if you not intrested in being stealth you can both choose a pistol to look cool or to have a 1d10 or 1d12 dmg in a ranged weapon.
In strictly mechanical terms, there's little practical benefit to firearms. Light and heavy crossbows are only a single damage step behind pistols and muskets, and each crossbow grade has more than twice the range of the equivalent firearm. Ammunition for crossbows is vastly easier to procure than ammunition for firearms, as are replacement crossbows. A pistol with the Repeating Shot infusion can (theoretically, with DM approval) be used alongside a shield...but so can a hand crossbow, and the handbow allows access to outrageously busted Crossbow Expert cheese.
The DMG blackpowder firearms are actively godawful, likely to try and dissuade players from obtaining/using them. They're extremely, implausibly terrible, which is a shame because being on the forefront of firearms technology in one's world is cool. The artificer is easily the best user of firearms given the existence of Repeating Shot to unhook the weapons from their ammunition issues, but Repeating Shot works just as well on any other weapon, too.
As a Battlesmith, Repeating Shot on a heavy crossbow gives you a nice blend of punch and range, as well as plenty of room for an awesome steampunk autobow. Repeating Shot on firearms can certainly work, but there's not much mechanical reason to do it if your character isn't a firearms nut.
I am not sure a hand-crossbow with Crossbow Expert is better for a Battlesmith then a pistol since you have a pet to command with your bonus action already. With a pistol and shield you have less range then a Heavy Crossbow but have what could be a significant (2-3 with a shield infusion) increase in your armor to compensate which isn't a terrible trade off.
In strictly mechanical terms, there's little practical benefit to firearms. Light and heavy crossbows are only a single damage step behind pistols and muskets, and each crossbow grade has more than twice the range of the equivalent firearm. Ammunition for crossbows is vastly easier to procure than ammunition for firearms, as are replacement crossbows. A pistol with the Repeating Shot infusion can (theoretically, with DM approval) be used alongside a shield...but so can a hand crossbow, and the handbow allows access to outrageously busted Crossbow Expert cheese.
The DMG blackpowder firearms are actively godawful, likely to try and dissuade players from obtaining/using them. They're extremely, implausibly terrible, which is a shame because being on the forefront of firearms technology in one's world is cool. The artificer is easily the best user of firearms given the existence of Repeating Shot to unhook the weapons from their ammunition issues, but Repeating Shot works just as well on any other weapon, too.
As a Battlesmith, Repeating Shot on a heavy crossbow gives you a nice blend of punch and range, as well as plenty of room for an awesome steampunk autobow. Repeating Shot on firearms can certainly work, but there's not much mechanical reason to do it if your character isn't a firearms nut.
DM Approval for gun and shield? I don't see why gun and shield wouldn't be allowed. Shield is one handed, pistol is one handed. I can cast magic through my pistol while holding both. I can shoot twice with the pistol without loading the weapon. Am I missing something here?
Would the Crossbow expert allow you to shoot the crossbow 3/4 times by Lv 5? Does the hand crossbow count as a one handed weapon?
I unfortunately, would have to agree, reading through everything. It is a real shame in the end. I was thinking a bit like Capt. America, lol. Maybe not as the main thing, but just some story to run with. Crafter/Utility unit, with the past/ability to just go tank and shoot some people in the face.
In strictly mechanical terms, there's little practical benefit to firearms. Light and heavy crossbows are only a single damage step behind pistols and muskets, and each crossbow grade has more than twice the range of the equivalent firearm. Ammunition for crossbows is vastly easier to procure than ammunition for firearms, as are replacement crossbows. A pistol with the Repeating Shot infusion can (theoretically, with DM approval) be used alongside a shield...but so can a hand crossbow, and the handbow allows access to outrageously busted Crossbow Expert cheese.
The DMG blackpowder firearms are actively godawful, likely to try and dissuade players from obtaining/using them. They're extremely, implausibly terrible, which is a shame because being on the forefront of firearms technology in one's world is cool. The artificer is easily the best user of firearms given the existence of Repeating Shot to unhook the weapons from their ammunition issues, but Repeating Shot works just as well on any other weapon, too.
As a Battlesmith, Repeating Shot on a heavy crossbow gives you a nice blend of punch and range, as well as plenty of room for an awesome steampunk autobow. Repeating Shot on firearms can certainly work, but there's not much mechanical reason to do it if your character isn't a firearms nut.
I am not sure a hand-crossbow with Crossbow Expert is better for a Battlesmith then a pistol since you have a pet to command with your bonus action already. With a pistol and shield you have less range then a Heavy Crossbow but have what could be a significant (2-3 with a shield infusion) increase in your armor to compensate which isn't a terrible trade off.
Which is what I was overall thinking. I would have 19/20AC, with +1 Magical Pistol that can shoot twice a turn and have the Gunner Perk, so to be able to be on the front lines without disadvantage and assist in getting to 19/20AC. Yes, I can snipe people out from far away anymore, but being pretty decked in armor and have a double shot of D10 isn't too bad. Maybe pick up Sharpshooter as well, making all 90ft be ok, instead of just 30ft. It is the range that basically just kills it in the end.
I agree that the Critical Role rules are superior to the DMG. I would use them (as a DM) because it is a risk/reward; yes its powerful, but there is always the misfire effect that is there.
The problem with the Critrole Guns is that they're balanced for the homebrew Gunslinger Fighter, which has abilities to mitigate the misfire feature, such as making it easier to swap weapons or repair guns with a bonus action. If your DM isn't giving you access to similar abilities, the guns become a major liability. Especially because you can't reliably put infusions on them... if you have a gun that you put an infusion on as your primary weapon and use as your primary spellcasting focus, if you get one bad roll you have to drop it and either waste a full turn in combat just repairing it or wrestling with item interactions to pull out a new weapon that, presumably, doesn't have an infusion empowering it.
I have a little kobald warlock that uses a crooked wand to shoot his eldritch blasts. He wears a 10 gallon hat and chaps. He speaks with a drawl and says pew, pew. when he casts. Does that count?
I agree that the Critical Role rules are superior to the DMG. I would use them (as a DM) because it is a risk/reward; yes its powerful, but there is always the misfire effect that is there.
The problem is that the Critical Role firearms don't really have the reward side of that risk/reward combo; the better guns are higher level custom crafted options that are introduced in place of the standard magic items everybody else will get (most of which will have no drawbacks), so even with Bad News having two damage dice, it's still not actually that amazing a weapon given what you'll be comparing it against.
Having a Misfire mechanic would make a lot of sense if there were a clear advantage to firearms, but a tiny bit of extra average damage (1 or 2 points usually) isn't worth it IMO; keep in mind that the Pathfinder class that the Critical Role Gunslinger was ported from existed in a game with multiple (two? I forget) defence values, so firearms actually bypassed armour as a real advantage to them. I've actually been looking at homebrew rules for armour piercing recently, but really 5th edition's goal was to simplify a lot of the game, and that's likely to be the trend going forward so we're probably not going to see anything like that again (though I feel like two defence values would be a good thing to bring back).
And really "Misfires" aren't unique to guns; bows and crossbows could suffer from problems as well in difficult conditions, such as strings breaking, mechanisms jamming etc. Plus even a good sword or mace could break, get lodged in a shield and so-on; if you want to be realistic then no character should be relying on any single weapon, because any weapon can suffer a mishap.
I've played the Critical Role Gunslinger and never really been happy with it, as much as I love the theming; I found Misfiring just slowed the game down and made failing a roll even more unpleasant for no real benefit. That's why I made my Gunfighter sub-class as an alternative using the DMG firearms. I did however trade gameplay complexity for going insane on crafting complexity with a complete custom crafting section, but that's not intended to be Gunfighter specific (if your DM is cool with using, then an Artificer could use the suggested options and rules, or tweak the crafting rules to something faster); while I'm probably biased, I enjoy that a lot more.
To jump back to the original post; firearms on an artificer are worth investing into if it suits your character better than a crossbow, otherwise functionally they're pretty similar. Firearms do a small amount more damage, but have worse range, and with Repeating Shot neither needs to worry about reloading, so you can use a pistol with a shield or whatever. Whether or not the range is important will depend a lot on your DM and how often they run fights with distant enemies; if you tend to get encounters where you're already relatively close then it isn't likely to be a big deal.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The benefit is that firebolt is not going to have your ability modifer added.
Fire bolt will be doing 1d10, a pistol will be doing 1d10+int or dex, and you can add the repeating shot for and extra +1 damage for a possible total of 1d10 +6, this is over double the average damage of fire bolt.
The infusion also means you don't need to reload or even have ammo
If you want the gunslinger style double pistol thing there are ways you can do it. Artillerist can make their turrets tiny and choose the shape, there for they can just make it another firearm they carry in their off hand using a bonus action to fire it.
Both battlesmith and armorer get a 2nd attack, you can take the repeating shot infusion to fire 2x and the homunculus servant. You choose what the servant looks like, make it a firearm and use your bonus action to use its ranged attack.
The armorer also has a ranged option on the infiltrator armor.
Some further thoughts from the peanut gallery: 1) pistol looking wands firing cantrips - only 1 shot a round but the damage increases with level, pistols can potentially fire 2 shots but the damage never grows ( except for Dex bonus growth which is minimal) take your choice. 2) DnD (1-5e) sped up the firing rates of both crossbows and pre 1835 guns to the point where there is little game mechanical difference between them, take your choice for roleplay not mechanical advantage. 3) real world early guns were in fact slow, cumbersome, expensive, innacurate at all but the closest ranges and relatively ineffective except for the psychological effect of the blasts and whizzing bullets. The first were matchlocks and the simplicity of the firing mechanism made them potentially useful militarily. The wheel lock was a beautiful piece of machinery but very delicate and as such mostly used on hunting pieces for the elites. While I’m sure there are earlier examples the first major uses of matchlocks seem to show up in the 1400s and may be best exemplified by the conquistadore’s uses in the conquests in the americas. The actual rate of fire expected for muzzle loading muskets was typically 4 shots per minute or 1 every 15 seconds so 2 shots every 5 rounds in game terms this could perhaps have been speeded up to every other round. Rifled guns were typically a little slower (3 shots a minute) but had greater accurate range ( 200 yds vs 50 for long weapons, 50’ vs 20’ for short - welcome to the 10 paces each for a smooth bore duel) . Guns don’t reach bow shot speeds (12-18 arrows/ minute or 1-2 shots a round) until the advent of repeating arms in the mid 1800s . 4) Crossbows actually weren’t much better. With the exception of the Chinese repeating crossbow they took considerably longer to load and fire than a regular bow but were usable by relatively untrained troops. After firing the prepared bolt you have to pull the string back behind the trigger catch cocking the bow, then place a new bolt in it then aim and fire. For heavier pulls of a light crossbow you put your foot in a stirrup holding it to the ground while cocking it. Either way you would actually be lucky to get off a shot every other round. Heavy cross bows are even worse as you had to use a windlass to crank the string back which might take 20-40 seconds giving you 1-2 shots a minute. Fine for firing down into a crowd from a castle wall but useless for DnD style combats. 5) so again, for game use they (guns and crossbows) were sped up to where they provide 1-2 shots a round. So take your pick based mostly on roleplay as mechanically they are essentially the same.
A pistol with the Repeating Shot infusion can (theoretically, with DM approval) be used alongside a shield...but so can a hand crossbow, and the handbow allows access to outrageously busted Crossbow Expert cheese.
RAW neither a hand crossbow nor a pistol can be fired more than once along side of a shield, even with repeating shot or XBE. Repeating shot and XBE eliminate the loading property but not the ammunition property. The ammunition property requires a free hand to load the weapon.
Ammunition. You can use a weapon that has the ammunition property to make a ranged attack only if you have ammunition to fire from the weapon. Each time you attack with the weapon, you expend one piece of ammunition. Drawing the ammunition from a quiver, case, or other container is part of the attack (you need a free hand to load a one-handed weapon). At the end of the battle, you can recover half your expended ammunition by taking a minute to search the battlefield.
I see a lot of people ignore the ammunition property with XBE, and this is one of the reasons that feat appears so broken. If you are holding two loaded hand crossbows on the first turn of combat you can shoot them each once. Then you need to drop one of them to load the other if you are going to use it again and this more or less keeps you from doing that trick again in future turns.
XBE can still be powerful on the first turn of combat and it can be combined with darts (which qualify for sharpshooter) or a thrown melee weapon (which doesn't) after the first turn, but RAW it is not as powerful as most make it out to be because of the ammunition property.
Are guns worth investing into?
The concept behind it for an Artificer is very interesting and fun, but gameplay wise, it just seems like a massive hinderance. 30/90ft or 40/120ft range. Would need to take sharpshooter to not always be at disadvantage, due to distance and unless you start with it immediately, down the line, firebolt becomes much better in the end, just by lv 5. Though it is single target vs two targets.
Has anyone find some way to make it more gameplay worthy, or is this really for basically story concept only?
I am assuming you are refering to the Renaissance Pistol and Musket from DMG due to the base range you mention.
So, I think they work very well conceptively and mechanically. In gameplay, they're pretty much the same as a hand and a light crossbow, with a bit of less range (more discrepant for the musket) but with a d10 or a d12 damage (which is a big deal in 5e).
About firebolt is the same if we compare it to any other weapon in the game: it depends whether a character is better (or prefer) wepons or spells or which one fits better at the moment.
Yea, I'm pretty sure my group wont allow multi-shot guns in the adventure. At least not at first, lol. Maybe once I get my hands on one, spend good amount of time with it. I can request towards being able to have multi-shot guns (more than just 1d anything).
Yea, I thought it through a bit more. Just means I wont be a long range type person, but a well armored in the face one with the pistol at least. Will need to think a bit for mustket/rifle.
Honestly? I would argue they are worse than crossbows. They make a big ol' bang. Though as I am re-reading the firearms section, it does not actually state anything about noise. No RAW, but perhaps RAI due to the nature of them? Minmaxing would say to take the crossbow for potential stealth stuff over spell usage anyway. Outside of story or thematic purposes, I would argue you should probably avoid guns.
That said, I absolutely have a character ready that uses firearms simply because it is thematic and backstory related (my group is very lenient though).
Have you considered reimagining your wand as a gun and simply firing your fire bolt thru it? If you want two shots use two weapon fighting and 2 wands and be a “ two gun desperado”
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Two weapon fighting doesn't work like this. It is only for Light Melee Weapons. Magic as a whole is very strict to one spell a turn used, unless otherwise stated on the spell or class. So shooting double firebolt in any round is probably never possible for majority of magic users. Unless you use Haste possibly? Or twinspell it? But you are just burning more to do that, makes it not worth it. Though good train of thought nonetheless.
I wouldn't ever be the stealthing character (Battlesmith), so that isn't really something I worry about, but I did think about that as well. At first, I don't see the DM using the "sound" of my gun above any other general noise produced during combat (Yelling, Clanging of metals, etc).
In strictly mechanical terms, there's little practical benefit to firearms. Light and heavy crossbows are only a single damage step behind pistols and muskets, and each crossbow grade has more than twice the range of the equivalent firearm. Ammunition for crossbows is vastly easier to procure than ammunition for firearms, as are replacement crossbows. A pistol with the Repeating Shot infusion can (theoretically, with DM approval) be used alongside a shield...but so can a hand crossbow, and the handbow allows access to outrageously busted Crossbow Expert cheese.
The DMG blackpowder firearms are actively godawful, likely to try and dissuade players from obtaining/using them. They're extremely, implausibly terrible, which is a shame because being on the forefront of firearms technology in one's world is cool. The artificer is easily the best user of firearms given the existence of Repeating Shot to unhook the weapons from their ammunition issues, but Repeating Shot works just as well on any other weapon, too.
As a Battlesmith, Repeating Shot on a heavy crossbow gives you a nice blend of punch and range, as well as plenty of room for an awesome steampunk autobow. Repeating Shot on firearms can certainly work, but there's not much mechanical reason to do it if your character isn't a firearms nut.
Please do not contact or message me.
Not being the stealthing character and not being put into a stealth situation are two different matters. I'm on the side of "having it, but not needing it", but your choice is your own.
Or even a mideveal one :
https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/3505933-repeating-crossbow-light-1
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Sure, but here we have a creteria we havn't before: stealthness.
So I do agree that crossbows are better in those situations, but beyond that, I still argue that firearms have both mechanical an theme porpouses on being choosen. I mean, if you not intrested in being stealth you can both choose a pistol to look cool or to have a 1d10 or 1d12 dmg in a ranged weapon.
I am not sure a hand-crossbow with Crossbow Expert is better for a Battlesmith then a pistol since you have a pet to command with your bonus action already. With a pistol and shield you have less range then a Heavy Crossbow but have what could be a significant (2-3 with a shield infusion) increase in your armor to compensate which isn't a terrible trade off.
DM Approval for gun and shield? I don't see why gun and shield wouldn't be allowed. Shield is one handed, pistol is one handed. I can cast magic through my pistol while holding both. I can shoot twice with the pistol without loading the weapon. Am I missing something here?
Would the Crossbow expert allow you to shoot the crossbow 3/4 times by Lv 5? Does the hand crossbow count as a one handed weapon?
I unfortunately, would have to agree, reading through everything. It is a real shame in the end. I was thinking a bit like Capt. America, lol. Maybe not as the main thing, but just some story to run with. Crafter/Utility unit, with the past/ability to just go tank and shoot some people in the face.
Which is what I was overall thinking. I would have 19/20AC, with +1 Magical Pistol that can shoot twice a turn and have the Gunner Perk, so to be able to be on the front lines without disadvantage and assist in getting to 19/20AC. Yes, I can snipe people out from far away anymore, but being pretty decked in armor and have a double shot of D10 isn't too bad. Maybe pick up Sharpshooter as well, making all 90ft be ok, instead of just 30ft. It is the range that basically just kills it in the end.
If your DM allows modern firearms or Critical Role firearms, use those. My DM allows Bad News rifles if the character is proficient with firearms.
Brains over brawn? Mind over matter? These canny warriors rightly answer, "Why not both?" - Tasha
My Homebrews: Monsters, Magic Items, Spells, Races
Rhulg- Hobgoblin Gunsmith
I agree that the Critical Role rules are superior to the DMG. I would use them (as a DM) because it is a risk/reward; yes its powerful, but there is always the misfire effect that is there.
The problem with the Critrole Guns is that they're balanced for the homebrew Gunslinger Fighter, which has abilities to mitigate the misfire feature, such as making it easier to swap weapons or repair guns with a bonus action. If your DM isn't giving you access to similar abilities, the guns become a major liability. Especially because you can't reliably put infusions on them... if you have a gun that you put an infusion on as your primary weapon and use as your primary spellcasting focus, if you get one bad roll you have to drop it and either waste a full turn in combat just repairing it or wrestling with item interactions to pull out a new weapon that, presumably, doesn't have an infusion empowering it.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
I have a little kobald warlock that uses a crooked wand to shoot his eldritch blasts. He wears a 10 gallon hat and chaps. He speaks with a drawl and says pew, pew. when he casts. Does that count?
The problem is that the Critical Role firearms don't really have the reward side of that risk/reward combo; the better guns are higher level custom crafted options that are introduced in place of the standard magic items everybody else will get (most of which will have no drawbacks), so even with Bad News having two damage dice, it's still not actually that amazing a weapon given what you'll be comparing it against.
Having a Misfire mechanic would make a lot of sense if there were a clear advantage to firearms, but a tiny bit of extra average damage (1 or 2 points usually) isn't worth it IMO; keep in mind that the Pathfinder class that the Critical Role Gunslinger was ported from existed in a game with multiple (two? I forget) defence values, so firearms actually bypassed armour as a real advantage to them. I've actually been looking at homebrew rules for armour piercing recently, but really 5th edition's goal was to simplify a lot of the game, and that's likely to be the trend going forward so we're probably not going to see anything like that again (though I feel like two defence values would be a good thing to bring back).
And really "Misfires" aren't unique to guns; bows and crossbows could suffer from problems as well in difficult conditions, such as strings breaking, mechanisms jamming etc. Plus even a good sword or mace could break, get lodged in a shield and so-on; if you want to be realistic then no character should be relying on any single weapon, because any weapon can suffer a mishap.
I've played the Critical Role Gunslinger and never really been happy with it, as much as I love the theming; I found Misfiring just slowed the game down and made failing a roll even more unpleasant for no real benefit. That's why I made my Gunfighter sub-class as an alternative using the DMG firearms. I did however trade gameplay complexity for going insane on crafting complexity with a complete custom crafting section, but that's not intended to be Gunfighter specific (if your DM is cool with using, then an Artificer could use the suggested options and rules, or tweak the crafting rules to something faster); while I'm probably biased, I enjoy that a lot more.
To jump back to the original post; firearms on an artificer are worth investing into if it suits your character better than a crossbow, otherwise functionally they're pretty similar. Firearms do a small amount more damage, but have worse range, and with Repeating Shot neither needs to worry about reloading, so you can use a pistol with a shield or whatever. Whether or not the range is important will depend a lot on your DM and how often they run fights with distant enemies; if you tend to get encounters where you're already relatively close then it isn't likely to be a big deal.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The benefit is that firebolt is not going to have your ability modifer added.
Fire bolt will be doing 1d10, a pistol will be doing 1d10+int or dex, and you can add the repeating shot for and extra +1 damage for a possible total of 1d10 +6, this is over double the average damage of fire bolt.
The infusion also means you don't need to reload or even have ammo
If you want the gunslinger style double pistol thing there are ways you can do it. Artillerist can make their turrets tiny and choose the shape, there for they can just make it another firearm they carry in their off hand using a bonus action to fire it.
Both battlesmith and armorer get a 2nd attack, you can take the repeating shot infusion to fire 2x and the homunculus servant. You choose what the servant looks like, make it a firearm and use your bonus action to use its ranged attack.
The armorer also has a ranged option on the infiltrator armor.
Some further thoughts from the peanut gallery:
1) pistol looking wands firing cantrips - only 1 shot a round but the damage increases with level, pistols can potentially fire 2 shots but the damage never grows ( except for Dex bonus growth which is minimal) take your choice.
2) DnD (1-5e) sped up the firing rates of both crossbows and pre 1835 guns to the point where there is little game mechanical difference between them, take your choice for roleplay not mechanical advantage.
3) real world early guns were in fact slow, cumbersome, expensive, innacurate at all but the closest ranges and relatively ineffective except for the psychological effect of the blasts and whizzing bullets. The first were matchlocks and the simplicity of the firing mechanism made them potentially useful militarily. The wheel lock was a beautiful piece of machinery but very delicate and as such mostly used on hunting pieces for the elites. While I’m sure there are earlier examples the first major uses of matchlocks seem to show up in the 1400s and may be best exemplified by the conquistadore’s uses in the conquests in the americas. The actual rate of fire expected for muzzle loading muskets was typically 4 shots per minute or 1 every 15 seconds so 2 shots every 5 rounds in game terms this could perhaps have been speeded up to every other round. Rifled guns were typically a little slower (3 shots a minute) but had greater accurate range ( 200 yds vs 50 for long weapons, 50’ vs 20’ for short - welcome to the 10 paces each for a smooth bore duel) . Guns don’t reach bow shot speeds (12-18 arrows/ minute or 1-2 shots a round) until the advent of repeating arms in the mid 1800s .
4) Crossbows actually weren’t much better. With the exception of the Chinese repeating crossbow they took considerably longer to load and fire than a regular bow but were usable by relatively untrained troops. After firing the prepared bolt you have to pull the string back behind the trigger catch cocking the bow, then place a new bolt in it then aim and fire. For heavier pulls of a light crossbow you put your foot in a stirrup holding it to the ground while cocking it. Either way you would actually be lucky to get off a shot every other round. Heavy cross bows are even worse as you had to use a windlass to crank the string back which might take 20-40 seconds giving you 1-2 shots a minute. Fine for firing down into a crowd from a castle wall but useless for DnD style combats.
5) so again, for game use they (guns and crossbows) were sped up to where they provide 1-2 shots a round. So take your pick based mostly on roleplay as mechanically they are essentially the same.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
RAW neither a hand crossbow nor a pistol can be fired more than once along side of a shield, even with repeating shot or XBE. Repeating shot and XBE eliminate the loading property but not the ammunition property. The ammunition property requires a free hand to load the weapon.
Ammunition. You can use a weapon that has the ammunition property to make a ranged attack only if you have ammunition to fire from the weapon. Each time you attack with the weapon, you expend one piece of ammunition. Drawing the ammunition from a quiver, case, or other container is part of the attack (you need a free hand to load a one-handed weapon). At the end of the battle, you can recover half your expended ammunition by taking a minute to search the battlefield.
I see a lot of people ignore the ammunition property with XBE, and this is one of the reasons that feat appears so broken. If you are holding two loaded hand crossbows on the first turn of combat you can shoot them each once. Then you need to drop one of them to load the other if you are going to use it again and this more or less keeps you from doing that trick again in future turns.
XBE can still be powerful on the first turn of combat and it can be combined with darts (which qualify for sharpshooter) or a thrown melee weapon (which doesn't) after the first turn, but RAW it is not as powerful as most make it out to be because of the ammunition property.