Why are Gun based RPGs so much more rare then the sword rpg's

[111111111]

I don't think it is a huge leap of a conclusion to make when stating that there are more Fantasy sword RPGs then ones where guns are the main weapon of choice.

Why is this?

What makes gun based worlds so much less of a persuasive option when creating choice and roleplaying based worlds?

 

[Lurker47]

Found the solution here.

 

[SniperHF]

Well if you go back to table top and such that was just the genre, fantasy and roleplaying were woven together. That history dictates much of the genre today whether the people participating are aware of it or not.


From a realism point of view there's a reason guns (and crossbows to a significant but lesser extent before them) were a great equalizer in history. It took years of training to be proficient in handling broadswords or lances or long bows. Then some schmuck on a wall who had a month of training shoots you with a hand cannon and all that training was a big fat waste of time.

Sure the elite of the elite, Navy Seals, competitive shooters or what have you are truly a cut above in terms of marksmanship. But the vast majority that handle firearms don't have a huge proficiency gap. Most engagements take place at short distances despite the range of the weapons. Skill in accuracy is important to a point but usually not the determining factor on whether you survive a shootout or not. So if you think about it in RPG terms, improving your "strength" or "dexterity" really ain't gonna do much of fucking anything for someone wielding a firearm. It's inherently less interesting at face value.

So to this end, People don't enjoy as much greatly abstracted firearms in games. If you point at it on the screen and push fire it's supposed to kill the other fucker. But when your bullets don't actually shoot where you aim that irritates the fuck out of people rightly or wrongly. Speaking mostly of first person games of course not the top down games.

The top down games usually address this differently with gun type skills. Long guns, pistols, machineguns, energy weapons etc. But in reality if you can proficiently shoot a handgun you can pretty well shoot an m16 to some degree. Where as in a game like ATOM you can't hit the broadside of a barn with a rifle if you're a pistol user. Some games use synergies but more often than not it's window dressing.

People obviously don't think about this, more so they have internalized it. Obviously it can and has been abstracted for gameplay reasons. But because of the realities of the weapons it makes it a less obvious choice from the outset and that has filtered throughout the years into game setting choices.

 

[nikolokolus]

For people that like RPGs, it seems to be pretty common that they also like a sense of progression or power fantasies for the most part; going from "zero to hero" or following some variation of the classic "Hero's Journey" monomyth. Class and level systems like D&D and derivatives are custom made for that kind of thing. Firearms on the other hand do not require a ton of experience or training to be lethal and (if implemented even somewhat realistically) act as great equalizers between the skilled and unskilled, making a coward just as formidable as a very brave man. You can definitely build an RPG system around that (GURPS, BRP, SPECIAL, etc.) but you have to find some way to blunt the power of firearms in some way, that usually means going futuristic, with ablative armor, power armor, high-tech ballistic fabrics, space-magic (psionics or "the force" et al.) and you're right back to a different kind of speculative fantasy.

So even though this is a great scene from a movie (and I'd love to play a game that would let you bypass some carefully placed boss fight like this) there's nothing all that heroic about it and you're probably better off just creating a shooter or an adventure game that can model this sort of thing.

 

[Tweed]

Have to give the Japanese credit where it's due, most of the Megaten games let you use guns OR swords.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Developers who are too scared to step beyond the D&D bounds and do anything besides make clones of clones of clones.

 

[Tigranes]

Developers who are too scared to step beyond the D&D bounds and do anything besides make clones of clones of clones.

If only gun based games were any more original or creative

 

[Wunderbar]

It makes sense that you're able to deal more damage with a sword if you're strong or skilled enough.
You can't increase the damage of your gun.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Developers who are too scared to step beyond the D&D bounds and do anything besides make clones of clones of clones.

If only gun based games were any more original or creative

It implies a setting other than bland-generic D&D fantasy, so, yes they are.

 

[Dodo1610]

Guns seem to be really unpopular among RPG nerds. Swords are weapons that take years to master while every child on this planet can pull a trigger and hit something, they like the idea that learning and hard training are rewarded. Also, guns feel more real and a lot of people play RPGs for escapism.
At least that's what I have heard when discussing the topic.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

It makes sense that you're able to deal more damage with a sword if you're strong or skilled enough.
You can't increase the damage of your gun.

Guns seem to be really unpopular among RPG nerds. Swords are weapons that take years to master while every child on this planet can pull a trigger and hit something, they like the idea that learning and hard training are rewarded. Also, guns feel more real and a lot of people play RPGs for escapism.
At least that's what I have heard when discussing the topic.

If this was true then there wouldn't be shooting competitions.
A more experienced marksman would "increase the damage of [their] gun" by actually hitting the target, especially when under pressure, and hitting vital organs.

 

[Neanderthal]

Well you see its because you're all misogynistic shitlords who need phallic symbols such as swords to deter women and people of colour (PINK IS NOT A COLOUR, FUCK YOU!) from playing crpgs. Now some of you might say that your todgers don't have pommels, quillons, leather wrapped hilts, or sharpened edges but...but...ah fuck.

STOP WALRUSING ME.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

It makes sense that you're able to deal more damage with a sword if you're strong or skilled enough.
You can't increase the damage of your gun.

Guns seem to be really unpopular among RPG nerds. Swords are weapons that take years to master while every child on this planet can pull a trigger and hit something, they like the idea that learning and hard training are rewarded. Also, guns feel more real and a lot of people play RPGs for escapism.
At least that's what I have heard when discussing the topic.

If this was true then there wouldn't be shooting competitions.
A more experienced marksman would "increase the damage of [their] gun" by actually hitting the target, especially when under pressure, and hitting vital organs.

Again, it goes back to earlier points in the game. Taking out all opposition before they even become aware of you at 600+ yards doesn't make for dynamic and interesting game play relative to swords and sorcery.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

It makes sense that you're able to deal more damage with a sword if you're strong or skilled enough.
You can't increase the damage of your gun.

Guns seem to be really unpopular among RPG nerds. Swords are weapons that take years to master while every child on this planet can pull a trigger and hit something, they like the idea that learning and hard training are rewarded. Also, guns feel more real and a lot of people play RPGs for escapism.
At least that's what I have heard when discussing the topic.

If this was true then there wouldn't be shooting competitions.
A more experienced marksman would "increase the damage of [their] gun" by actually hitting the target, especially when under pressure, and hitting vital organs.

Again, it goes back to earlier points in the game. Taking out all opposition before they even become aware of you at 600+ yards doesn't make for dynamic and interesting game play relative to swords and sorcery.

Taking out opposition at range with a bullet is too much but a fireball is fine?
…ok.

 

[J1M]

I don't think it is a huge leap of a conclusion to make when stating that there are more Fantasy sword RPGs then ones where guns are the main weapon of choice.

Why is this?

What makes gun based worlds so much less of a persuasive option when creating choice and roleplaying based worlds?

It's hard to build a skill tree out of "shot" and "double shot". Always ends up as some sort of skill line.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I don't think it is a huge leap of a conclusion to make when stating that there are more Fantasy sword RPGs then ones where guns are the main weapon of choice.

Why is this?

What makes gun based worlds so much less of a persuasive option when creating choice and roleplaying based worlds?

It's hard to build a skill tree out of "shot" and "double shot". Always ends up as some sort of skill line.

You mean it's easier to copy existing work than produce something original. Which I implied in my first comment.

Developers who are too scared to step beyond the D&D bounds and do anything besides make clones of clones of clones.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Spoiler

It makes sense that you're able to deal more damage with a sword if you're strong or skilled enough.
You can't increase the damage of your gun.

Guns seem to be really unpopular among RPG nerds. Swords are weapons that take years to master while every child on this planet can pull a trigger and hit something, they like the idea that learning and hard training are rewarded. Also, guns feel more real and a lot of people play RPGs for escapism.
At least that's what I have heard when discussing the topic.

If this was true then there wouldn't be shooting competitions.
A more experienced marksman would "increase the damage of [their] gun" by actually hitting the target, especially when under pressure, and hitting vital organs.

Again, it goes back to earlier points in the game. Taking out all opposition before they even become aware of you at 600+ yards doesn't make for dynamic and interesting game play relative to swords and sorcery.

Taking out opposition at range with a bullet is too much but a fireball is fine?
…ok.

Emphasis on "Taking out all opposition before they even become aware of you at 600+ yards". The point is that firearms tend to limit the variety of combat encounters, or pre-empt them entirely. You're being deliberately obtuse. Read SniperHF's post if something about this topic is bewildering you.

 

[HoboForEternity]

Developers who are too scared to step beyond the D&D bounds and do anything besides make clones of clones of clones.

If only gun based games were any more original or creative

underrail . . .

 

[J1M]

I don't think it is a huge leap of a conclusion to make when stating that there are more Fantasy sword RPGs then ones where guns are the main weapon of choice.

Why is this?

What makes gun based worlds so much less of a persuasive option when creating choice and roleplaying based worlds?

It's hard to build a skill tree out of "shot" and "double shot". Always ends up as some sort of skill line.

You mean it's easier to copy existing work than produce something original. Which I implied in my first comment.

Developers who are too scared to step beyond the D&D bounds and do anything besides make clones of clones of clones.

No, my point, made in a very clever way, was that there is more gameplay variety in melee combat. Playful verbiage allows one to make a point without several pages of text.

Not only are there a wide variety of melee weapons, the difference between a sword and a bow is much starker than the difference between any two guns.

In terms of talents, people find the idea of someone spinning around with a sword less immersion breaking than someone shooting in every direction because swordcraft is not part of our modern life.

 

[Glaucon]

The structure of the genre inherently suggests a premodern setting.

 

[JarlFrank]

Found the solution here.

More like.

 

[Cosmo]

Why is this?

Cultural pervasiveness of fantasy and strong symbolic dimension attached to swords (to the point of making them a synecdochal image for everything fantasy).

 

[Tao]

Shadowrun

 

[CyberWhale]

Players and developers being boring and unimaginative nerds who like shitty and derivative fantasy settings (calling them medievalesque is an insult to history and Tolkienesque to proper fantasy literature) .

 

[JarlFrank]

People who claim gunfights wouldn't be interesting in an RPG should play Jagged Alliance 2 and 7.62 High Calibre.