So I have DM'd once before and I'm going to run the Spelljammer Academy Adventure for some friends of mine. One of them is going to play a monk but has asked me if firearms are allowed, because he thinks the gunner feat looks good. This adventure starts at level 1 and I'm not sure if it will break the game on multiple levels (I don't know a lot about Faerun and the rest of the forgotten realms, including if firearms exist yet or not and I don't know if being able to deal 1d10 (+dex I believe?) damage with a pistol is too powerful at level 1 or not). If I am going to allow it I'll probably make him pay the full cost of it and if he doesn't have the money necessary to buy it before the game starts (250gp excluding ammo) I might have him get a discount at the stores in the academy, but I'm not sure yet. Any suggestions on what I should do?
The damage from a pistol (1d10 piercing) is comparable to someone swinging a greatsword, so I don't think it's completely game breaking from that perspective. It's obviously a ranged weapon, but if you were to compare it to someone with the sharpshooter feat and a longbow, i reckon the sharpshooter would come out on top.
So lore-wise in Faerun, it depends a bit on the time you are setting your campaign in - pre-spell plague, Lantan was a big producer of smoke powder (the alchemy equivalent of gunpowder), but subsequent evens resulted in it being much reduced. However, in a later time setting, that could have easily resumed.
I'd say a lot of it depends on how you like the flavour of your campaign to run. For spelljammer, firearms doesn't seem as big a deal in my opinion. But you do of course also have ways of limiting the use of it through the availability of ammunition and smoke-powder.
So, one thing I would say is to be very clear about reload times up front. What type of firearm does the character have and how long does it take to reload.
I dislike the firearms mechanics in D&D because of how poorly thought out much of it is. In historical contexts, by the time the world hit the 1800s (300+ years into firearms existing) a good musketeer or rifleman could fire two, maybe three shots a minute. Most of that time was reloading and priming. Likewise the pepper-box was an early but largely unreliable/inaccurate pistol which when one considers reloading after the initial barrage averaged to around three to four shots per minute. By comparison an English Longbowman was said to be able to put out up to 10 arrows per minute...in some cases there are reports of 15 arrows a minute (but that would be an astounding feat possible only because young people trained with the bow from the age of 12 in England).
Being brutal, I've never had a good experience DMing a game where firearms are included. Now that's often because I'm setting world as an equivalent of the early modern era so players frequently get really disappointed when they can't get a pepper-box like from Critical Role.
Gunner in particular though shows how poorly thought out firearms are in D&D mechanics. That feat ignores the loading feature and that I worry is going to unbalance things and outright break the mechanics. Of course this depends heavily on your setting and if you want your players to be superhuman at relatively early levels. The types of real world weapons these things are meant to be based on mechanically couldn't handle being fired and then reloaded in 12 seconds (two combat rounds), so not only would a character have superhuman speed, but a highly advanced piece of tech. Firearms tend, in my experience to massively deal out consistently higher damage than other ranged attacks can. Hunting rifle in particular can output 2d10 damage.
Of course, I don't have access to all of Spelljammer, so am interested to see if they add new firearms that are better thought through. Likewise you may have no problems with any of this. My 2p worth though is that firearms just need reconsidering or homebrewing to work in your setting. I don't like them personally, you may not have such issues though.
Hello! Great question! I have been DM'ing for a while now and have used both the regular 5E Rules for guns and the Critical Role variants. Personally, I haven't had any issues with players using either type of firearm. You gotta be careful with which version you choose as they have slightly different rules and range. But, I found success in making the individual that uses guns keep track of their ammo at early levels and spend gold/time to craft their own ammo. But, after level 7 I largely abandon this in favor of not getting bogged down in downtime.
Aquilain makes some really good points above but I largely throw-out comparing it to our modern history. In the games I run D&D really falls apart if you look at it to realistically, but your mileage may vary. If a little bit of historical accuracy lends credibility to your story and makes sense, then go for it.
That said, it really boils down to communication with your Monk player. Lay down what you are thinking and why, make sure that they get the feel they want for their character while maintaining game balance and keep it open to be adjusted if he comes up with something that you think is ruining peoples fun. Since he is going Monk, ask him if his goal is to to wield a pistol in a Matrix/Gun-Fu style while trying to use his Flurry of Blows with a pistol. Then you can decide if you want that in your game and if so, help him be the bad-ass he wants to be!
Have fun!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Richness, in the final measure, is not weighed in gold coins, but in the number of people you have touched, the tears of those who mourn your passing, and the fond rememberances of those who continue to celebrate your life. " -Drizzt Do'Urden
Gunner, as a feat, seems somewhat overtuned compared to crossbow expert, because it gives +1 to Dex. Ignoring that issue, giving PCs guns at level 1 is about equivalent to giving them +1 weapons at level 1 (both in terms of effectiveness and in terms of nominal cost), which is... a significant but not game-breaking power increase.
That said, it really boils down to communication with your Monk player. Lay down what you are thinking and why, make sure that they get the feel they want for their character while maintaining game balance and keep it open to be adjusted if he comes up with something that you think is ruining peoples fun. Since he is going Monk, ask him if his goal is to to wield a pistol in a Matrix/Gun-Fu style while trying to use his Flurry of Blows with a pistol. Then you can decide if you want that in your game and if so, help him be the bad-ass he wants to be!
Well I asked and it seems he wants to use the musket, by using the dedicated weapon feature he gets at level 2, as a monk weapon. And in combination with the gunner feat, giving him no disadvantage on attacking within 5 feet of the target, he can do 1d12 damage with the musket and then bonus action Flurry of Blows or unarmed strike. This is starting to feel pretty strong or even kind of gamebreaking in my opinion.
I don't think this is particularly game breaking. He could do the same thing with a Broadsword, Longbow and Weapon Master and the only differences would be that he would do more damage at range and that doesn't have to switch weapons to change between attacking melee or at range.
Edit: The most pressing issue I can see is the pricetag of the weapon and you could always have him start with something simpler and work for the money.
Well I asked and it seems he wants to use the musket, by using the dedicated weapon feature he gets at level 2, as a monk weapon. And in combination with the gunner feat, giving him no disadvantage on attacking within 5 feet of the target, he can do 1d12 damage with the musket and then bonus action Flurry of Blows or unarmed strike. This is starting to feel pretty strong or even kind of gamebreaking in my opinion.
So I would not allow a musket for the following reasons:
- A monk weapon must not have the two-handed feature, and a musket is two handed
- Even if they use the dedicated weapon at level 2, the weapon cannot have a special category, which I would argue that a weapon with the renaissance tag falls under - but admittedly open for interpretation.
But again, even with a musket, it's not really the weapon that's way off balance. a d12 is in the high end, but you get other weapons that scale to similar (greatsword would still have a marginally higher average damage).
So I would not allow a musket for the following reasons:
- A monk weapon must not have the two-handed feature, and a musket is two handed
- Even if they use the dedicated weapon at level 2, the weapon cannot have a special category, which I would argue that a weapon with the renaissance tag falls under - but admittedly open for interpretation.
In the dedicated weapon feature it doesn't mention anything about two-handed weapons not being allowed, is it just that a two-handed weapon can never be a monk weapon or am I missing something?
Normal monk weapons can't be two handed but the optional feature is so that you can use weapons beyond normal monk weapons. As written, the optional rule allows doing it with a two handed weapon but, since it is an optional rule, it is up to the dm's discretion. For example, one could say that it makes little sense that you could fight effectively while manipulating a two handed weapon with one arm (which would mess with flurty of blows). I am not sure if the advantage the player would get would merit the hassle of arguing about it though. They do need to get proficiency in the weapon to do it which needs either multiclassing or taking a feat instead of an aSI after all so it is not like they get it for free.
In the dedicated weapon feature it doesn't mention anything about two-handed weapons not being allowed, is it just that a two-handed weapon can never be a monk weapon or am I missing something?
No - your are absolutely right, that only applied for monk weapons at level 1 as an optional rule
The dedicated weapons at level 2 doesn't stipulate this, instead requiring it to be simple/martial, that you are proficient with it, and that it doesn't have the heavy or special properties.
So in pure RAW, a musket is probably fine, since it is listed as a martial weapon (I don't really agree with proficiency in martial weapons being equal to proficiency in firearms, but given the character has taken the gunner feat, some thought has at least gone into it). It doesn't have the special properties, but is instead tagged with "renaissance" which doesn't really fit in anywhere. Maybe it's because I very rarely run firearms in campaigns that i lean towards a stricter interpretation, but as I commented afterwards, I don't think it is massively game-breaking, so if this was a real key feature for this character, then I wouldn't die in the ditch over it :)
I've run several sessions at level 1 with firearms and it's not OP. If you do need to adjust, add a few hit points to each enemy so they can't be easily one-shotted or add another enemy or two to each encounter. If this unbalances against the players, use storytelling to save them and adjust your encounters appropriately afterward.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I have DM'd once before and I'm going to run the Spelljammer Academy Adventure for some friends of mine. One of them is going to play a monk but has asked me if firearms are allowed, because he thinks the gunner feat looks good. This adventure starts at level 1 and I'm not sure if it will break the game on multiple levels (I don't know a lot about Faerun and the rest of the forgotten realms, including if firearms exist yet or not and I don't know if being able to deal 1d10 (+dex I believe?) damage with a pistol is too powerful at level 1 or not). If I am going to allow it I'll probably make him pay the full cost of it and if he doesn't have the money necessary to buy it before the game starts (250gp excluding ammo) I might have him get a discount at the stores in the academy, but I'm not sure yet. Any suggestions on what I should do?
The damage from a pistol (1d10 piercing) is comparable to someone swinging a greatsword, so I don't think it's completely game breaking from that perspective. It's obviously a ranged weapon, but if you were to compare it to someone with the sharpshooter feat and a longbow, i reckon the sharpshooter would come out on top.
So lore-wise in Faerun, it depends a bit on the time you are setting your campaign in - pre-spell plague, Lantan was a big producer of smoke powder (the alchemy equivalent of gunpowder), but subsequent evens resulted in it being much reduced. However, in a later time setting, that could have easily resumed.
I'd say a lot of it depends on how you like the flavour of your campaign to run. For spelljammer, firearms doesn't seem as big a deal in my opinion. But you do of course also have ways of limiting the use of it through the availability of ammunition and smoke-powder.
Thank you very much, this is definitely very helpful!
So, one thing I would say is to be very clear about reload times up front. What type of firearm does the character have and how long does it take to reload.
I dislike the firearms mechanics in D&D because of how poorly thought out much of it is. In historical contexts, by the time the world hit the 1800s (300+ years into firearms existing) a good musketeer or rifleman could fire two, maybe three shots a minute. Most of that time was reloading and priming. Likewise the pepper-box was an early but largely unreliable/inaccurate pistol which when one considers reloading after the initial barrage averaged to around three to four shots per minute. By comparison an English Longbowman was said to be able to put out up to 10 arrows per minute...in some cases there are reports of 15 arrows a minute (but that would be an astounding feat possible only because young people trained with the bow from the age of 12 in England).
Being brutal, I've never had a good experience DMing a game where firearms are included. Now that's often because I'm setting world as an equivalent of the early modern era so players frequently get really disappointed when they can't get a pepper-box like from Critical Role.
Gunner in particular though shows how poorly thought out firearms are in D&D mechanics. That feat ignores the loading feature and that I worry is going to unbalance things and outright break the mechanics. Of course this depends heavily on your setting and if you want your players to be superhuman at relatively early levels. The types of real world weapons these things are meant to be based on mechanically couldn't handle being fired and then reloaded in 12 seconds (two combat rounds), so not only would a character have superhuman speed, but a highly advanced piece of tech. Firearms tend, in my experience to massively deal out consistently higher damage than other ranged attacks can. Hunting rifle in particular can output 2d10 damage.
Of course, I don't have access to all of Spelljammer, so am interested to see if they add new firearms that are better thought through. Likewise you may have no problems with any of this. My 2p worth though is that firearms just need reconsidering or homebrewing to work in your setting. I don't like them personally, you may not have such issues though.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Hello! Great question! I have been DM'ing for a while now and have used both the regular 5E Rules for guns and the Critical Role variants. Personally, I haven't had any issues with players using either type of firearm. You gotta be careful with which version you choose as they have slightly different rules and range. But, I found success in making the individual that uses guns keep track of their ammo at early levels and spend gold/time to craft their own ammo. But, after level 7 I largely abandon this in favor of not getting bogged down in downtime.
Aquilain makes some really good points above but I largely throw-out comparing it to our modern history. In the games I run D&D really falls apart if you look at it to realistically, but your mileage may vary. If a little bit of historical accuracy lends credibility to your story and makes sense, then go for it.
That said, it really boils down to communication with your Monk player. Lay down what you are thinking and why, make sure that they get the feel they want for their character while maintaining game balance and keep it open to be adjusted if he comes up with something that you think is ruining peoples fun. Since he is going Monk, ask him if his goal is to to wield a pistol in a Matrix/Gun-Fu style while trying to use his Flurry of Blows with a pistol. Then you can decide if you want that in your game and if so, help him be the bad-ass he wants to be!
Have fun!
"Richness, in the final measure, is not weighed in gold coins, but in the number of people you have touched, the tears of those who mourn your passing, and the fond rememberances of those who continue to celebrate your life. "
-Drizzt Do'Urden
Gunner, as a feat, seems somewhat overtuned compared to crossbow expert, because it gives +1 to Dex. Ignoring that issue, giving PCs guns at level 1 is about equivalent to giving them +1 weapons at level 1 (both in terms of effectiveness and in terms of nominal cost), which is... a significant but not game-breaking power increase.
Well I asked and it seems he wants to use the musket, by using the dedicated weapon feature he gets at level 2, as a monk weapon. And in combination with the gunner feat, giving him no disadvantage on attacking within 5 feet of the target, he can do 1d12 damage with the musket and then bonus action Flurry of Blows or unarmed strike. This is starting to feel pretty strong or even kind of gamebreaking in my opinion.
Ah yes, gun-kata monks. I've seen that movie.....
If you have any concerns then just re-skin a hand crossbow to be a pistol, and let them know they can find/buy more powerful weapons as they level up.
I don't think this is particularly game breaking. He could do the same thing with a Broadsword, Longbow and Weapon Master and the only differences would be that he would do more damage at range and that doesn't have to switch weapons to change between attacking melee or at range.
Edit: The most pressing issue I can see is the pricetag of the weapon and you could always have him start with something simpler and work for the money.
So I would not allow a musket for the following reasons:
- A monk weapon must not have the two-handed feature, and a musket is two handed
- Even if they use the dedicated weapon at level 2, the weapon cannot have a special category, which I would argue that a weapon with the renaissance tag falls under - but admittedly open for interpretation.
But again, even with a musket, it's not really the weapon that's way off balance. a d12 is in the high end, but you get other weapons that scale to similar (greatsword would still have a marginally higher average damage).
In the dedicated weapon feature it doesn't mention anything about two-handed weapons not being allowed, is it just that a two-handed weapon can never be a monk weapon or am I missing something?
Normal monk weapons can't be two handed but the optional feature is so that you can use weapons beyond normal monk weapons. As written, the optional rule allows doing it with a two handed weapon but, since it is an optional rule, it is up to the dm's discretion. For example, one could say that it makes little sense that you could fight effectively while manipulating a two handed weapon with one arm (which would mess with flurty of blows). I am not sure if the advantage the player would get would merit the hassle of arguing about it though. They do need to get proficiency in the weapon to do it which needs either multiclassing or taking a feat instead of an aSI after all so it is not like they get it for free.
No - your are absolutely right, that only applied for monk weapons at level 1 as an optional rule
The dedicated weapons at level 2 doesn't stipulate this, instead requiring it to be simple/martial, that you are proficient with it, and that it doesn't have the heavy or special properties.
So in pure RAW, a musket is probably fine, since it is listed as a martial weapon (I don't really agree with proficiency in martial weapons being equal to proficiency in firearms, but given the character has taken the gunner feat, some thought has at least gone into it). It doesn't have the special properties, but is instead tagged with "renaissance" which doesn't really fit in anywhere.
Maybe it's because I very rarely run firearms in campaigns that i lean towards a stricter interpretation, but as I commented afterwards, I don't think it is massively game-breaking, so if this was a real key feature for this character, then I wouldn't die in the ditch over it :)
I've run several sessions at level 1 with firearms and it's not OP. If you do need to adjust, add a few hit points to each enemy so they can't be easily one-shotted or add another enemy or two to each encounter. If this unbalances against the players, use storytelling to save them and adjust your encounters appropriately afterward.