So I'm trying to make a wild west theme campaign and my biggest issue is that I have three players who are gun enthusiasts and I am terrified about incorporating guns. I mean the DMG states that they are martial weapons in the charts that have some guns but in the pages before the chart that states them it talks about fire arms proficiency. My players argue that they don't need to add firearms proficiency to this since it is a wild west campaign setting and thereby everybody has guns and by so everyone should treat them as martial weapons. Then there's the issue with the mechanics themselves. Again these three players are gun enthusiasts and know guns WAY better than I and disagree with the mechanics that D&D provides while I look at these mechanics from a game balancing point of view and to me the mechanics make some sense while at the same time I don't want to upset my three players (they make up the majority of the party). All three want to use guns and have tried to propose house rule modifications but when i actually think about the options they suggest, such as incorporating a "real life and period correct style gun" into the game with modifications that, in my opinion, makes the gun on par with a 2nd level spell for a first level character just makes things unbalanced and while I know I can have the enemies have that same gun; one hit will out right kill any player at first level... I just can't seem to reach a level of agreement with them. And we all want to do a wild west campaign... I have looked at the Eberon book and Critical Roll's gunslinger for the fighter for help but once again I can't seem to get to a level of agreement between me and the players for us to actually start building characters and me running the campaign.
Gun dorks are bigger lore queens than comic book dorks, I swear. I see two ways to handle this. 1) They're like Daffy Duck demanding that you shoot them now. So shoot them now. Give them the guns they want and If it kills them at first level, tough. Hell, if they're into real-world period correctness, take away healing magic and let the gunshots they survive get infected so they're double-amputees by third level; 2) You priced out guns as being equivalent to a second level spell? Don't let them have guns until third level. Start the campaign with them getting wiped out in an avalanche going through a mountain pass. They can spend an hour digging through the wreckage and come across a lever-action rifle, but the barrel is completely bent. They've got knives, they can make spears and maybe a bow with a good survival roll. Nobody sees a gun until they find their way to the fur trading post downriver, by which time, they're level three. The trading post owner has one double-barrel shotgun which your guys can fight over until they get to town, by which time they're level 4 or 5. Then they get to buy their period-accurate six-shooters to fight their period-accurate orcs and goblins.
I agree with them about the proficiency thing. Around 1600, during the 80 Years War, a soldier might have gotten training in Martial weapons, but still not specialized training in using an arquebus. If your technology is supposed to be early Modern, 1870's-1900's, it's fair to include a musket or rifle as a Martial weapon (whether you still count a sword as a martial weapon is a whole different question).
Maybe try a different system than D&D. There are some old west systems out there.
Or try explaining to them the rule system does not support guns as they want them to be, and they need to just get over it. D&D is not and never has been an attempt at realistic simulation. You’re trying to shoehorn in something that’s barely supported in the rules, and they should just deal with it. You can point them toward those message boards where people complain that the different sorts or armor did not all exist at the same time historically to show them the game isn’t trying for accuracy, it’s trying for fun. As for the proficiency, I doubt it would be game breaking to just let them be proficient. Maybe you do something like take away other proficiencies, then, like greatsword and flail or something. Old west they could just run around with guns and daggers and call it good.
Probably you thought of this, but outside of using the critical role rules, which seem pretty good and well balanced, The really easy way would be to re-skin hand crossbows, bows and crossbows, with the same rate of fire restrictions and damage and range and such. Then you know it will be balanced in game.
Reskinning is a good idea, but the flintlock pistol damage isn't outrageous. It's the same damage dice as an eldritch blast: 1d10 (which means that a warlock has a better version of a pistol built in. Just make it have like ... six bullets before reloading. Ultimately, the firearms as listed in the DMG are suggestions for stats. You can decide how it works in your game.
And if they want to be prima donnas about it, give in, have them go up against properly kitted adversaries and let the dice murder them. Then, do as all good designers do, adjust your design based on critical system failures (e.g. having all of the players gunned down because a level 1 player is not designed to be on the receiving end of 2d10 attacks.) Then use that as an excuse to bring the weapons down to something reasonable and in line with normal D&D values OR use it as an excuse to have the players start at a much higher level.
So I was just going through the PHB fighter class on dndbeyond, and it has a 'gunslinger' martial archetype list. Not sure which sourcebook that comes from, but it does have rules for period appropriate guns. https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/fighter#Gunslinger
So I was just going through the PHB fighter class on dndbeyond, and it has a 'gunslinger' martial archetype list. Not sure which sourcebook that comes from, but it does have rules for period appropriate guns. https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/fighter#Gunslinger
It’s not from a book, it’s from critical role. If it will be in the new setting book remains to be seen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I'm trying to make a wild west theme campaign and my biggest issue is that I have three players who are gun enthusiasts and I am terrified about incorporating guns. I mean the DMG states that they are martial weapons in the charts that have some guns but in the pages before the chart that states them it talks about fire arms proficiency. My players argue that they don't need to add firearms proficiency to this since it is a wild west campaign setting and thereby everybody has guns and by so everyone should treat them as martial weapons. Then there's the issue with the mechanics themselves. Again these three players are gun enthusiasts and know guns WAY better than I and disagree with the mechanics that D&D provides while I look at these mechanics from a game balancing point of view and to me the mechanics make some sense while at the same time I don't want to upset my three players (they make up the majority of the party). All three want to use guns and have tried to propose house rule modifications but when i actually think about the options they suggest, such as incorporating a "real life and period correct style gun" into the game with modifications that, in my opinion, makes the gun on par with a 2nd level spell for a first level character just makes things unbalanced and while I know I can have the enemies have that same gun; one hit will out right kill any player at first level... I just can't seem to reach a level of agreement with them. And we all want to do a wild west campaign... I have looked at the Eberon book and Critical Roll's gunslinger for the fighter for help but once again I can't seem to get to a level of agreement between me and the players for us to actually start building characters and me running the campaign.
Gun dorks are bigger lore queens than comic book dorks, I swear. I see two ways to handle this. 1) They're like Daffy Duck demanding that you shoot them now. So shoot them now. Give them the guns they want and If it kills them at first level, tough. Hell, if they're into real-world period correctness, take away healing magic and let the gunshots they survive get infected so they're double-amputees by third level; 2) You priced out guns as being equivalent to a second level spell? Don't let them have guns until third level. Start the campaign with them getting wiped out in an avalanche going through a mountain pass. They can spend an hour digging through the wreckage and come across a lever-action rifle, but the barrel is completely bent. They've got knives, they can make spears and maybe a bow with a good survival roll. Nobody sees a gun until they find their way to the fur trading post downriver, by which time, they're level three. The trading post owner has one double-barrel shotgun which your guys can fight over until they get to town, by which time they're level 4 or 5. Then they get to buy their period-accurate six-shooters to fight their period-accurate orcs and goblins.
I agree with them about the proficiency thing. Around 1600, during the 80 Years War, a soldier might have gotten training in Martial weapons, but still not specialized training in using an arquebus. If your technology is supposed to be early Modern, 1870's-1900's, it's fair to include a musket or rifle as a Martial weapon (whether you still count a sword as a martial weapon is a whole different question).
Maybe try a different system than D&D. There are some old west systems out there.
Or try explaining to them the rule system does not support guns as they want them to be, and they need to just get over it. D&D is not and never has been an attempt at realistic simulation. You’re trying to shoehorn in something that’s barely supported in the rules, and they should just deal with it. You can point them toward those message boards where people complain that the different sorts or armor did not all exist at the same time historically to show them the game isn’t trying for accuracy, it’s trying for fun. As for the proficiency, I doubt it would be game breaking to just let them be proficient. Maybe you do something like take away other proficiencies, then, like greatsword and flail or something. Old west they could just run around with guns and daggers and call it good.
Probably you thought of this, but outside of using the critical role rules, which seem pretty good and well balanced, The really easy way would be to re-skin hand crossbows, bows and crossbows, with the same rate of fire restrictions and damage and range and such. Then you know it will be balanced in game.
Reskinning is a good idea, but the flintlock pistol damage isn't outrageous. It's the same damage dice as an eldritch blast: 1d10 (which means that a warlock has a better version of a pistol built in. Just make it have like ... six bullets before reloading. Ultimately, the firearms as listed in the DMG are suggestions for stats. You can decide how it works in your game.
And if they want to be prima donnas about it, give in, have them go up against properly kitted adversaries and let the dice murder them. Then, do as all good designers do, adjust your design based on critical system failures (e.g. having all of the players gunned down because a level 1 player is not designed to be on the receiving end of 2d10 attacks.) Then use that as an excuse to bring the weapons down to something reasonable and in line with normal D&D values OR use it as an excuse to have the players start at a much higher level.
So I was just going through the PHB fighter class on dndbeyond, and it has a 'gunslinger' martial archetype list. Not sure which sourcebook that comes from, but it does have rules for period appropriate guns. https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/fighter#Gunslinger
It’s not from a book, it’s from critical role. If it will be in the new setting book remains to be seen.