Let's compare a Maul to any firearm. Best cast scenario for both. Point blank at a still target. A maul to the head, any part, any direction, the only head bones that remain are teeth, but they're over there. Compare that to anything other than a shot gun. Skull will remain.
That’s irrelevant if the cavitation from the bullet has turned the brain inside the skull to soup.
There would likely be very large exit hole as well.
Maybe, it depends on the caliber. A .22 will just rattle around in there doing even more damage, a .45 will likely leave an exit wound the size of a grapefruit.
Considering that the musket is roughly the equivalent of a .50 caliber, I promise there will be a large hole.
Let's compare a Maul to any firearm. Best cast scenario for both. Point blank at a still target. A maul to the head, any part, any direction, the only head bones that remain are teeth, but they're over there. Compare that to anything other than a shot gun. Skull will remain.
That’s irrelevant if the cavitation from the bullet has turned the brain inside the skull to soup.
There would likely be very large exit hole as well.
Maybe, it depends on the caliber. A .22 will just rattle around in there doing even more damage, a .45 will likely leave an exit wound the size of a grapefruit.
Considering that the musket is roughly the equivalent of a .50 caliber, I promise there will be a large hole.
Considering that the musket is roughly the equivalent of a .50 caliber, I promise there will be a large hole.
That substantially underrates .50 and/or overrates the musket. Muskets generally have comparable ballistics to shotgun, and .50 BMG has about four times the energy of 12 gauge slugs.
Considering that the musket is roughly the equivalent of a .50 caliber, I promise there will be a large hole.
That substantially underrates .50 and/or overrates the musket. Muskets generally have comparable ballistics to shotgun, and .50 BMG has about four times the energy of 12 gauge slugs.
Caliber is a measure of the bore of the barrel thus the size of the projectile. For example the Springfield model 1855 had a .58 caliber bore.
Edit for more clarity: The grain of the modern .50 rounds are much higher and is indeed more powerful, but does not change the fact that the musket is a high caliber weapon.
Yeah, the difference between being shot in the head with a musket and being shot in the head with a modern .50 caliber rifle is that the musket isn't likely to overpenetrate after killing the target while the modern bullet will continue on its merry way to hit whatever happened to be behind the person it shot.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yeah, the difference between being shot in the head with a musket and being shot in the head with a modern .50 caliber rifle is that the musket isn't likely to overpenetrate after killing the target while the modern bullet will continue on its merry way to hit whatever happened to be behind the person it shot.
It is to buff NPCs while passing it off as "Realistic storytelling" or trick players into thinking they are munchkins for wanting guns, as you arrange your Nth firing line of disposable NPCs that do not care about misfire risks, reload times, or expenses.
Any player with the biggest possible gun they can wield in a campaign, will never compare to pulling the slot machine lever and spamming guns against the party. If a gun explodes in the player's face, that is a long term problem for the party. If a gun explodes in the face of an enemy, who cares? That just means one less gun for the party to sell for coppers!
Games need mechanics, and while a short bow dealing 1d6 and a longbow dealing 1d8 with the same arrow is bonkers, I get the whole, "it's a game" thing.
....are are you for real?
just after a quick google search shortbows of any medieval period were around a draw weight of 30lbs, (not counting well made ones for war, which might be closer to 50)
which made them go far less in length then any longbow of that time, which would be around 80-150 lbs....not only would they go farther, they would generally hit harder as well, because they were going faster and were somewhat heavier
as another person stated in this discussion already Mass x velocity = force, and when both are increased, your able to hurt people much easier with the increased force
Thats why guns hit harder in dnd as well, they are much faster and a lead bullet weighs similar too the same amount if not more then an arrow.
Ignoring the modern firearms for a minute, the Pistol and the Musket are quite balanced against options like the Longbow and the Heavy Crossbow.
Look at the ranges: Pistol (30/90), Musket (40/120), Crossbow Heavy (100/400), Longbow (150/600). The gunslinger will be a pincushion before they get in range.
The irony is the historic advantage of firearms are not represented well in D&D. Firearms should be simple ranged weapons with damages in the range of longbows. The advantage is that it takes years to learn to shoot a bow well and any peasant can use a gun. Additionally, bows required a lot of physical strength to use effectively. Firearms don't. Firearms are easy to use, therefore gunners are cheap compared to bowmen. They shouldn't, especially with early firearms, do more damage. The historical legacy of them having replaced bows makes people think that was because they're better. Arguably, they didn't outperform bows until the invention of rifling.
Well, the game doesn't say what era the firearms presented in the DMG are supposed to represent, but I think that they seem more like 18th-19th Century tech than a 15th Century matchlock.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Any black-powder muzzle-loading firearm that can manage one shot every six seconds is an anachronistic technological marvel with no real-world analogue.
Any black-powder muzzle-loading firearm that can manage one shot every six seconds is an anachronistic technological marvel with no real-world analogue.
this, this is also why i like to think of it as just cleaning the barrel and having some weird reloader thing with magic, but this in and of itself is really a marvel for that tech
Any black-powder muzzle-loading firearm that can manage one shot every six seconds is an anachronistic technological marvel with no real-world analogue.
It would probably be more reasonable to change the renaissance pistol and musket to 2d6 and 2d8 and make them both one use per combat. While we can build more powerful firearms today than they could in the Renaissance, for the most part we don't bother and instead focus on lighter, more accurate, longer range, faster to shoot, bigger magazine, etc.
Any black-powder muzzle-loading firearm that can manage one shot every six seconds is an anachronistic technological marvel with no real-world analogue.
It would probably be more reasonable to change the renaissance pistol and musket to 2d6 and 2d8 and make them both one use per combat. While we can build more powerful firearms today than they could in the Renaissance, for the most part we don't bother and instead focus on lighter, more accurate, longer range, faster to shoot, bigger magazine, etc.
I would say let them use a similar action system like what siege engines use. Of course, then people would just run around with a brace of pistols and reload them in between fights like they did IRL.
Any black-powder muzzle-loading firearm that can manage one shot every six seconds is an anachronistic technological marvel with no real-world analogue.
That's true for basically every ranged weapon in the game. Compare, say HARP, where you can fire a longbow once every four combat rounds.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
That's true for basically every ranged weapon in the game. Compare, say HARP, where you can fire a longbow once every four combat rounds.
One shot per six seconds for a medieval longbow is not horribly out of line (sources vary, but 5-10 seconds is the typical range of estimates). The real problems with bows in 5e are that the accurate range is too long (against moving targets, a flight time above half a second or so is mostly a matter of luck, which would give a short range of about 100') and movement rates for the charging enemies that want to kill you are too low (60'/6 sec is 6.8 mph).
A trained British Redcoat could fire 4 rounds per minute with a muzzleloader with a cartridge (premeasured power and ball). So, the rate of fire needs to drop a lot. Multi-attack with a muzzle loader, no. At best, give the player whose proficient with a muzzleloader 4 rounds per minute, and require at least a round of no action to load. Something like rd 1: fire then rd 2-3 reload, reload 4 fire, rd 5-6 reload, rd 7 fire, rd 8 reload, rd 9 fire, rd 10 reload and then restart it over again. It gives the shooter an incentive to keep loading to fire if they want to do it longer term and also gives an incentive to switch to melee weapons after the first fire, which makes the most sense.
Water can and will douse the powder making it useless in rain or possibly a damp dungeon even a create water spell could take out the powder as well. I'm more for science fiction type weapons like blasters with a limited charge, that is fun for a short while, but doesn't become the end all be all. See Expedition to Barrier Peaks.
That depends on the bow. The English longbow had draw weights that were estimated to be up to 180 lbs in the case of the largest bows. Considering that a modern bow rarely has a draw weight above 60 lbs. Saying that a first level character can loose an arrow from a bow that powerful once every six seconds in a combat situation and maintain any sort of accuracy is... ambitious.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Considering that the musket is roughly the equivalent of a .50 caliber, I promise there will be a large hole.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Oh yeah, bigbig.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
That substantially underrates .50 and/or overrates the musket. Muskets generally have comparable ballistics to shotgun, and .50 BMG has about four times the energy of 12 gauge slugs.
Caliber is a measure of the bore of the barrel thus the size of the projectile. For example the Springfield model 1855 had a .58 caliber bore.
Edit for more clarity: The grain of the modern .50 rounds are much higher and is indeed more powerful, but does not change the fact that the musket is a high caliber weapon.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Yeah, the difference between being shot in the head with a musket and being shot in the head with a modern .50 caliber rifle is that the musket isn't likely to overpenetrate after killing the target while the modern bullet will continue on its merry way to hit whatever happened to be behind the person it shot.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Very true. But you are very very dead either way.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Indeed.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
It is to buff NPCs while passing it off as "Realistic storytelling" or trick players into thinking they are munchkins for wanting guns, as you arrange your Nth firing line of disposable NPCs that do not care about misfire risks, reload times, or expenses.
Any player with the biggest possible gun they can wield in a campaign, will never compare to pulling the slot machine lever and spamming guns against the party. If a gun explodes in the player's face, that is a long term problem for the party. If a gun explodes in the face of an enemy, who cares? That just means one less gun for the party to sell for coppers!
....are are you for real?
just after a quick google search shortbows of any medieval period were around a draw weight of 30lbs, (not counting well made ones for war, which might be closer to 50)
which made them go far less in length then any longbow of that time, which would be around 80-150 lbs....not only would they go farther, they would generally hit harder as well, because they were going faster and were somewhat heavier
as another person stated in this discussion already Mass x velocity = force, and when both are increased, your able to hurt people much easier with the increased force
Thats why guns hit harder in dnd as well, they are much faster and a lead bullet weighs similar too the same amount if not more then an arrow.
Ignoring the modern firearms for a minute, the Pistol and the Musket are quite balanced against options like the Longbow and the Heavy Crossbow.
Look at the ranges: Pistol (30/90), Musket (40/120), Crossbow Heavy (100/400), Longbow (150/600). The gunslinger will be a pincushion before they get in range.
The irony is the historic advantage of firearms are not represented well in D&D. Firearms should be simple ranged weapons with damages in the range of longbows. The advantage is that it takes years to learn to shoot a bow well and any peasant can use a gun. Additionally, bows required a lot of physical strength to use effectively. Firearms don't. Firearms are easy to use, therefore gunners are cheap compared to bowmen. They shouldn't, especially with early firearms, do more damage. The historical legacy of them having replaced bows makes people think that was because they're better. Arguably, they didn't outperform bows until the invention of rifling.
Well, the game doesn't say what era the firearms presented in the DMG are supposed to represent, but I think that they seem more like 18th-19th Century tech than a 15th Century matchlock.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Any black-powder muzzle-loading firearm that can manage one shot every six seconds is an anachronistic technological marvel with no real-world analogue.
Please do not contact or message me.
this, this is also why i like to think of it as just cleaning the barrel and having some weird reloader thing with magic, but this in and of itself is really a marvel for that tech
It would probably be more reasonable to change the renaissance pistol and musket to 2d6 and 2d8 and make them both one use per combat. While we can build more powerful firearms today than they could in the Renaissance, for the most part we don't bother and instead focus on lighter, more accurate, longer range, faster to shoot, bigger magazine, etc.
I would say let them use a similar action system like what siege engines use. Of course, then people would just run around with a brace of pistols and reload them in between fights like they did IRL.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
That's true for basically every ranged weapon in the game. Compare, say HARP, where you can fire a longbow once every four combat rounds.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
One shot per six seconds for a medieval longbow is not horribly out of line (sources vary, but 5-10 seconds is the typical range of estimates). The real problems with bows in 5e are that the accurate range is too long (against moving targets, a flight time above half a second or so is mostly a matter of luck, which would give a short range of about 100') and movement rates for the charging enemies that want to kill you are too low (60'/6 sec is 6.8 mph).
A trained British Redcoat could fire 4 rounds per minute with a muzzleloader with a cartridge (premeasured power and ball). So, the rate of fire needs to drop a lot. Multi-attack with a muzzle loader, no. At best, give the player whose proficient with a muzzleloader 4 rounds per minute, and require at least a round of no action to load. Something like rd 1: fire then rd 2-3 reload, reload 4 fire, rd 5-6 reload, rd 7 fire, rd 8 reload, rd 9 fire, rd 10 reload and then restart it over again. It gives the shooter an incentive to keep loading to fire if they want to do it longer term and also gives an incentive to switch to melee weapons after the first fire, which makes the most sense.
Water can and will douse the powder making it useless in rain or possibly a damp dungeon even a create water spell could take out the powder as well. I'm more for science fiction type weapons like blasters with a limited charge, that is fun for a short while, but doesn't become the end all be all. See Expedition to Barrier Peaks.
That depends on the bow. The English longbow had draw weights that were estimated to be up to 180 lbs in the case of the largest bows. Considering that a modern bow rarely has a draw weight above 60 lbs. Saying that a first level character can loose an arrow from a bow that powerful once every six seconds in a combat situation and maintain any sort of accuracy is... ambitious.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.