The technical term of "point blank" is the range where a trained gunman can expect to hit their target's vital organs without having to account for external factors like gravity and wind.
How trained a gunman are we talking about here? And does that also exclude needing to account for external factors like a target that's moving and trying to kill you?
Not from any sort of realism standpoint.
Completely absurd. You know that Reflex Defense, what used to be Touch AC, is supposed to represent? It's supposed to represent an attack that must merely touch you in order to take effect (fire and electricity are great examples of this). That's why armor doesn't help, because that still counts enough as touching you. Tell me, do you get hurt from picking up a bullet? No, you don't. A bullet doesn't hurt you by touching you. A bullet hurts you by getting launched out of a gun and penetrating your body. This is just like a sword or an arrow. Those don't hurt you just by touching you. They hurt you because they're enough speed behind them to penetrate your flesh.
This is why I have a bit of a thematic problem with many martial attack powers in 4E that target Reflex. They don't really make any sense. If they're trying to represent a more precision strike or one that pierces armor, then they should just give an additional bonus to hit as part of the power. 3.5 got this right from a realistic point of view.
Sure, we could reflavor scale mail into kevlar.
Or we can just say that scale mail offers some protection against bullets too, which it does in real life anyway. It's not much protection, no, but I don't see anything thematically troubling about exaggerating it a bit for the sake of the game.
Why not?
For the same reason that, despite the fact that magic is conceptually superior to martial prowess in every way, we still want casters to be balanced with martial characters. Realism doesn't matter if it means that only a select few things are really going to be viable in the game. We don't play D&D because we want to run a Harry-Potter-style campaign where everybody's a wizard because there's no point in being anything else because wizards can do everything. We play D&D because we like the variety that it can offer, letting us play as many different kinds of characters as possible while still being badass doing it.
Evil Dead.
Never seen it. Way before my time.
A good example of "gun fu", in which every one appears to be jumping around like Jeci and superheroes in the high Paragon or Epic Tier. They certainly aren't 3rd level characters running up falling steel girders and doing triple back flips and... dodging bullets shot at close range.
I fail to see any problem. That's what looks cool and looks both thematically and mechanically balanced, so that, if anything, is the sort of thing that I would like D&D to offer.
If you want D&D to be running the style of game where everybody has a gun and wants shootout battles from behind cover all of the time, then arrange that with your players, same as you would do if you wanted everybody to play a Wizard for a Harry-Potter-style campaign.
Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha
Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further.
Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
Trained enough to not shoot off his foot. It's just basic training that is used to determine point blank range. Guns are reliably accurate. Even flintlocks. But not over large distances, like across a battlefield.
They hurt you because they're enough speed behind them to penetrate your flesh.
Except for plate armor against flintlocks, or modern any-bullet technology, armor is not useful against bullets. It shouldn't count as a defense to them. You don't want to use 3e's Reflex? Fine. Then it should be AC without any armor or shield bonus.
Or we can just say that scale mail offers some protection against bullets too, which it does in real life anyway.
No, it doesn't. Scale mail isn't thick enough to stop a bullet, unless it's from the very first firearms. And then we're just talking about a gun that goes off once an encounter.
Realism doesn't matter
I'm not arguing realism. I'm arguing for cinema. There's a reason whild west gunslingers, or even Civil War soldiers, don't walk around with scale mail. It didn't help against bullets and the armor that could help against bullets would make you walk at a snail's pace.
if it means that only a select few things are really going to be viable in the game.
Fine, then no guns at all. I'm okay with that too. I just don't want guns that are reflavored longbows.
Evil Dead.
Never seen it. Way before my time.
Well, now you know.
that, if anything, is the sort of thing that I would like D&D to offer.
Bully for you. I already said gun fu should be an option.
Well, it looks like we're just going to be at a stand-still disagreement, so I don't see much point in continuing this debate. I'll just end with this statement:
My opinion is clearly better than yours because I'm smarter than you and know what's better for you than you do.
Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha
Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further.
Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
Thats the ticket right there. surely this would be some kind of module or houserule thing. I really don't expect to see it on the equipment list in the PHB. So, it would seem to me that you could do it whichever way you want. With a page or so of advice on the different ways you could go with it in the DMG. Options would be the name of the game.
For some examples of what I'm talking about, here's some famous cinematic gunfights.
Tombstone's Shoot-Out at the OK Corral (start at 1:30). It takes place with combat between shooters less than 50 feet from one another. In the first six seconds, the Earps, who clearly get initiative, have shot and hit every one of the Clantons who showed a weapon. None of the Earps are hit, yet. In round two (1:36-1:42), Ike Clanton (unarmed) calls for parley, and everyone readies action, except Tom McLaury, who got to cover behind a horse and pulled a weapon, which sets off the readied action. Tom gets shot and another Clanton is brought down. In round three and four (1:43-1:57), Ike -- the only one standing -- parleys. He is told to withdraw and he does. In round five, (1:57-2:03), Tom, who apparently spent a healing surge, gets off and shoots wildly (total defense?). He is taken down, but Doc Holliday gets grazed. At the end of round six (2:03-2:10), Frank McLaury, who finally stabilized and spent a healing surge, shoots an Earp. In round seven (2:11-2:17), the Earps unload into Frank, killing him. Meanhile, Ike finds his nerve, seeing his brother killed, steals a gun from someone else and begins shooting from cover. (2:17-23). In round nine (2:23-29), the Earps shoot at Ike, who now has cover. (Another Clanton gets up, too.) In round ten (2:29-2:35), Ike loses his nerve again, retreating behind the cover of gunsmoke and the building where he took refuge. In round eleven (2:35-2:41), he makes a Stealth check and then runs. In round twelve and thirteen (2:41-2:53), there is no shooting. One Clanton remains, and then Wyatt makes as if he's out of bullets. In round fourteen (2:53-2:59), he gets shot twice. Combat over.
Nor do I want that. I am not and never have asked for guns to do more damage. In fact I specifically said that would be a horrible result, though that's like 90% of the gun-rules proposals you see put forward. (And is more or less the way it was done in 3e.)
I want an option for gunfights to resemble movie gunfights. For a rules-based incentive to be to find cover, like the Clantons did in the movie I cite above. (I forgot to supply the link.)
Another option would be for rules for gun-fu style fights. Another option might involve trench warfare style fights. And another option for three musketeers guns-as-encounter-powers. But gun as the equavalent of a hand crossbow +1? Why?
Nor do I want that. I am not and never have asked for guns to do more damage. In fact I specifically said that would be a horrible result, though that's like 90% of the gun-rules proposals you see put forward. (And is more or less the way it was done in 3e.)
I want an option for gunfights to resemble movie gunfights. For a rules-based incentive to be to find cover, like the Clantons did in the movie I cite above. (I forgot to supply the link.)
Another option would be for rules for gun-fu style fights. Another option might involve trench warfare style fights. And another option for three musketeers guns-as-encounter-powers. But gun as the equavalent of a hand crossbow +1? Why?
I have no problem with options for cinematic gunfights, or any of the things you mentioned there, and I also don't want them to do massive damage. We do have to start somewhere for their weapon stats though, and a crossbow is a good place to start. How it will be modified will no doubt depend on the kind of gun (whether it be a Tommy Gun, a Colt 1911, a Winchester, a flintlock, or what-have-you).
so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.
Really? So it goes something like this?
Fighter: "I want to be a paladin." NPC: "Really?" Fighter: "Yes." NPC: "Very well." Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?" Fighter: "I do." NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?" Fighter: "What?" NPC: "I don't know what it means either." Fighter: "Oh. Umm, ok I do." NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics." Fighter: "These what?" NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."
So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion? Here's a scenario. The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land. They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges. Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.
Part 1: I didn't describe any of the hits. What does he see?
Part 2: Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up. What does he see?
No, it doesn't. Scale mail isn't thick enough to stop a bullet, unless it's from the very first firearms. And then we're just talking about a gun that goes off once an encounter.
Yep, the effect of a bullet on an ancient armor is devastating. Go check it, this is the effect of an early gun used in the Battle of Pavia (1525) versus a fullplate armor (sorry the link is in italian, but that's the best I know...). I don't know if it can pierce throught a knight and hit the other knight behind it, but it's damn close :p
