Quote from RangerTwoBlades >>

I think that semi-automatic guns WOULDN'T work with magic. Maybe flintlocks would work, because it is rather simple. I would be very opposed to bolt loading, semi-automatic, percussion cap, revolvers, and lever action rifles.

 I think bolt-action and other manual-operated guns would be able to do the normal amount of attacks a turn. However, with semi-autos, you can take an attack action with it, and then do another attack with it with a bonus action without adding your dexterity modifier to that second attack.

Yes, that makes sense.

Quote from Joshua_the_Autistic_Tiefling >>

Quote from RangerTwoBlades >>

I think that semi-automatic guns WOULDN'T work with magic. Maybe flintlocks would work, because it is rather simple. I would be very opposed to bolt loading, semi-automatic, percussion cap, revolvers, and lever action rifles.

 I think bolt-action and other manual-operated guns would be able to do the normal amount of attacks a turn. However, with semi-autos, you can take an attack action with it, and then do another attack with it with a bonus action without adding your dexterity modifier to that second attack.

I'd say that a bolt-action rifle should be limited to two shots per round, with the second shot being made at disadvantage.  Revolvers and lever-action rifles can make a maximum of two shots per round without disadvantage.  Semi-automatics are restricted only by how much ammo they have in the magazine and how many attacks you can make.

Quote from 6thLyranGuard >>

Quote from Joshua_the_Autistic_Tiefling >>

Quote from RangerTwoBlades >>

I think that semi-automatic guns WOULDN'T work with magic. Maybe flintlocks would work, because it is rather simple. I would be very opposed to bolt loading, semi-automatic, percussion cap, revolvers, and lever action rifles.

 I think bolt-action and other manual-operated guns would be able to do the normal amount of attacks a turn. However, with semi-autos, you can take an attack action with it, and then do another attack with it with a bonus action without adding your dexterity modifier to that second attack.

I'd say that a bolt-action rifle should be limited to two shots per round, with the second shot being made at disadvantage.  Revolvers and lever-action rifles can make a maximum of two shots per round without disadvantage.  Semi-automatics are restricted only by how much ammo they have in the magazine and how many attacks you can make.

 Back in 3E, some my gun friendly gamers decided to ignore reality and go with game balance. We finally went with a breech loader ( think double barrel Shotgun). Attacks per round just defaulted to how many attacks per round the pc could do.  I think I may have a 3E magical musketeer on my pc somewhere.

Quote from jasperrdm >>

Quote from 6thLyranGuard >>

Quote from Joshua_the_Autistic_Tiefling >>

Quote from RangerTwoBlades >>

I think that semi-automatic guns WOULDN'T work with magic. Maybe flintlocks would work, because it is rather simple. I would be very opposed to bolt loading, semi-automatic, percussion cap, revolvers, and lever action rifles.

 I think bolt-action and other manual-operated guns would be able to do the normal amount of attacks a turn. However, with semi-autos, you can take an attack action with it, and then do another attack with it with a bonus action without adding your dexterity modifier to that second attack.

I'd say that a bolt-action rifle should be limited to two shots per round, with the second shot being made at disadvantage.  Revolvers and lever-action rifles can make a maximum of two shots per round without disadvantage.  Semi-automatics are restricted only by how much ammo they have in the magazine and how many attacks you can make.

 Back in 3E, some my gun friendly gamers decided to ignore reality and go with game balance. We finally went with a breech loader ( think double barrel Shotgun). Attacks per round just defaulted to how many attacks per round the pc could do.  I think I may have a 3E magical musketeer on my pc somewhere.

Breech loading weapons are kinda fast, but they would need a strong strength score, and a good dexterity score.

One point to consider - if magic always existed then things like firearms may not have been developed. There are a lot of factors (economic and political mostly) on why certain technologies don't get developed. If the ruling class were wizards (a practice which is controlled and takes a lot of study) it is reasonable they might be wary of something anyone can use easily (guns). Therefore they outlaw firearms or control the flow of explosives. This would be similar to how the Roman Catholic Church excommunicated the crossbow. Another option is that magic is just so useful people don't find another way to go things. Why invent a washing machine when someone with little effort can mutter a few words and clean your clothes? (Prestidigitation). 

If magic has recently appeared or returned then that is a whole different question. 

Ah.... But if you were trying to defeat an army of invading casters, you would need very strong ranged weaponry. Otherwise casters just nuke you and your walls into oblivion.

Quote from Okahey >>

One point to consider - if magic always existed then things like firearms may not have been developed. There are a lot of factors (economic and political mostly) on why certain technologies don't get developed. If the ruling class were wizards (a practice which is controlled and takes a lot of study) it is reasonable they might be wary of something anyone can use easily (guns). Therefore they outlaw firearms or control the flow of explosives. This would be similar to how the Roman Catholic Church excommunicated the crossbow. Another option is that magic is just so useful people don't find another way to go things. Why invent a washing machine when someone with little effort can mutter a few words and clean your clothes? (Prestidigitation). 

If magic has recently appeared or returned then that is a whole different question. 

 I would actually think that wizards wouldn't ban guns. They aren't as easy to use as people think they are (requires decent dexterity for even a small handgun). Also, I think that wizards would use guns as a chance to develop new styles of spellcasting, such as enchanting them or casting spells on the bullets to make them more powerful.

Quote from Joshua_the_Autistic_Tiefling >>

Quote from Okahey >>

One point to consider - if magic always existed then things like firearms may not have been developed. There are a lot of factors (economic and political mostly) on why certain technologies don't get developed. If the ruling class were wizards (a practice which is controlled and takes a lot of study) it is reasonable they might be wary of something anyone can use easily (guns). Therefore they outlaw firearms or control the flow of explosives. This would be similar to how the Roman Catholic Church excommunicated the crossbow. Another option is that magic is just so useful people don't find another way to go things. Why invent a washing machine when someone with little effort can mutter a few words and clean your clothes? (Prestidigitation). 

If magic has recently appeared or returned then that is a whole different question. 

 I would actually think that wizards wouldn't ban guns. They aren't as easy to use as people think they are (requires decent dexterity for even a small handgun). Also, I think that wizards would use guns as a chance to develop new styles of spellcasting, such as enchanting them or casting spells on the bullets to make them more powerful.

 Exactly! Magic guns, like the Casters from Outlaw Star. They would likely enchant them. Extra range, extra damage, extra speed, extra power, and even less recoil. So casters would probably start relying on enchanted guns more than anything else. Also, the more powerful ones either have an INSANELY long barrel and high recoil, or they are rather small and STILL have high recoil. 

Quote from RangerTwoBlades >>

 

 

Quote from Joshua_the_Autistic_Tiefling >>

Quote from Okahey >>

One point to consider - if magic always existed then things like firearms may not have been developed. There are a lot of factors (economic and political mostly) on why certain technologies don't get developed. If the ruling class were wizards (a practice which is controlled and takes a lot of study) it is reasonable they might be wary of something anyone can use easily (guns). Therefore they outlaw firearms or control the flow of explosives. This would be similar to how the Roman Catholic Church excommunicated the crossbow. Another option is that magic is just so useful people don't find another way to go things. Why invent a washing machine when someone with little effort can mutter a few words and clean your clothes? (Prestidigitation). 

If magic has recently appeared or returned then that is a whole different question. 

 I would actually think that wizards wouldn't ban guns. They aren't as easy to use as people think they are (requires decent dexterity for even a small handgun). Also, I think that wizards would use guns as a chance to develop new styles of spellcasting, such as enchanting them or casting spells on the bullets to make them more powerful.

 Exactly! Magic guns, like the Casters from Outlaw Star. They would likely enchant them. Extra range, extra damage, extra speed, extra power, and even less recoil. So casters would probably start relying on enchanted guns more than anything else. Also, the more powerful ones either have an INSANELY long barrel and high recoil, or they are rather small and STILL have high recoil. 

 For the more powerful guns, I would include a recoil Save feature for them, since those would tend to be either using high recoil calibers (such as very high-caliber sniper rifles), or are somewhat impractically small for the caliber they fire (such as a sawed-off 12-gauge double barrel shotgun having more recoil than its full-size counterpart due to being less front heavy). Basically, after the character makes the attack and rolls damage (rolling damage is optional), they have to make a Strength save (DC depends on gun), or take 1d4 Bludgeoning damage due to improperly handling the weapon's recoil in some way (such as shouldering the weapon incorrectly, or holding it in an unsafe way, like holding a .50 cal desert eagle without both of the the user's hands holding that frikin' huge gun firmly).

This way, characters are capable of dealing a good amount of ranged piercing damage for some of the more powerful guns, but they should be careful in doing so. This forces more tactical and smart firearms combat. If the character is low on health and they have both a sniper rifle with a recoil save DC of 14, and their Strength save bonus is only +1, but they also have an M1911 handgun with no recoil save DC, but does less damage, the character's player should consider using the M1911 instead of the sniper rifle.

Also, some guns, such as sniper rifles, would have disadvantage in tight hallways, and their disadvantage range would be 10-15 ft., instead of 5. Just makes sense because sniper rifles are meant to be used at long range. Unless the rifle has easily accessed iron sights (most sniper rifles don't have iron sights, or even backup iron sights on top of the scope), the user would feel awkward looking down the scope to aim at enemies that are only 10-15 ft. away.

Also, always assume that characters are aiming down their gun's sights when making an attack roll, unless the character usually goes guns akimbo.

Yes! Shotguns should have some SERIOUS disadvantage at any range of 50 feet. Snipers should have disadvantage at, like you said 10-15 feet, and those little pocket handguns should have disadvantage at 30 feet range, but advantage in close combat, like any other handgun that isn't 250000 feet long.

Quote from RangerTwoBlades >>

Yes! Shotguns should have some SERIOUS disadvantage at any range of 50 feet. Snipers should have disadvantage at, like you said 10-15 feet, and those little pocket handguns should have disadvantage at 30 feet range, but advantage in close combat, like any other handgun that isn't 250000 feet long.

 Actually, most modern handguns can go 50 feet+ easily (most pistols wouldn't have difficulty until, like, 100ft.), so it doesn't make sense for them to have disadvantage at 30 feet. A concealed carry handgun is designed for 30-50 feet, so they wouldn't have difficulty until about 70 ft.

A desert eagle, however, would most likely have the highest range of all the handguns, being chambered in .50 AE and all that. Most likely, the difficult range for a deagle wouldn't be until about 120 ft., depending on model.

Some shotguns can actually easily hit a target at a range of 70 ft. with buckshot, especially ones designed for competition.

Good point. But, the sights aren't scopes, they are iron sights.

Quote from RangerTwoBlades >>

Good point. But, the sights aren't scopes, they are iron sights.

 I'm confused. Can you clarify?

So iron sights normally consist of three blade like things. One in the middle, almost at the tip of the barrel. Then there's the other two. They almost provide a frame for the tip blade. You aim down them, and use the usually marked spot on the tip as your aiming point.

Quote from RangerTwoBlades >>

So iron sights normally consist of three blade like things. One in the middle, almost at the tip of the barrel. Then there's the other two. They almost provide a frame for the tip blade. You aim down them, and use the usually marked spot on the tip as your aiming point.

 I know that, but why did you say that they would be iron sights, not scopes?

Quote from Okahey >>

One point to consider - if magic always existed then things like firearms may not have been developed. There are a lot of factors (economic and political mostly) on why certain technologies don't get developed. If the ruling class were wizards (a practice which is controlled and takes a lot of study) it is reasonable they might be wary of something anyone can use easily (guns). Therefore they outlaw firearms or control the flow of explosives. This would be similar to how the Roman Catholic Church excommunicated the crossbow. Another option is that magic is just so useful people don't find another way to go things. Why invent a washing machine when someone with little effort can mutter a few words and clean your clothes? (Prestidigitation). 

If magic has recently appeared or returned then that is a whole different question. 

 Actually, it was submerged during the middle ages but rediscovered during the American Revolution. So they were developed at the same time.

Quote from Joshua_the_Autistic_Tiefling >>

Quote from RangerTwoBlades >>

So iron sights normally consist of three blade like things. One in the middle, almost at the tip of the barrel. Then there's the other two. They almost provide a frame for the tip blade. You aim down them, and use the usually marked spot on the tip as your aiming point.

 I know that, but why did you say that they would be iron sights, not scopes?

 Handguns are unlikely to have scopes, because they have a wider range of error, and, they have more muzzle lift. Scopes are best used when almost right next to your face. One shot of a scope and your face go bye-bye.