Why so few guns in fantasy RPGs?

[rusty_shackleford]

As for reload times, muzzleloading firearm expert Balazs Nemeth says various period manuals give an average of 2-3 shots a minute for groups of men using smoothbore muzzleloaders in battlefield conditions.

a well trained company managed 3, and sometimes even 4 volleys a minute, an individual trained soldier could reload in 10-15 seconds.

a competent musketeer could load without command four or five times in a minute, and the platoon could fire five salvos on command in two minutes, and this was increased to almost three per minute

With regards to the OP: the long reload time for muzzle-loading firearms is a misconception -- rifles really did take that much time to load, muskets did not.


The idea that men using bows required training whereas those using firearms did not is silly btw. Try reloading a musket in 10 seconds, then try doing it in the middle of a battle under pressure, your friends dying, and while being shot at.

 

[deuxhero]

rusty_shackleford
Hence "battlefield conditions". That's tightly packed men (likely not that well trained) all trying to do the same thing while explosives are happening around them, which makes any task significantly harder. Rifles are even slower, but light infantry also enjoy significantly better personal space when it came to reloading.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

rusty_shackleford
Hence "battlefield conditions". That's tightly packed men (likely not that well trained) all trying to do the same thing while explosives are happening around them, which makes any task significantly harder. Rifles are even slower, but light infantry also enjoy significantly better personal space when it came to reloading.

Well, yes, I assume we're talking about people that are well above the 'average' given the context. Heck, this is a good of place as any to put a morale(or what have you) failure check for it to take longer.

It just seems odd to me that people are entirely OK with crossbows in their fantasy games and think longbowmen were capable of rapid firing volleys, but worry about reload times of muskets.
English longbowmen -- highly trained, surely -- did not fire that much faster than well-trained soldiers using muskets. Apologies to the non-native English speakers for the following,

Suppose one thousande Archers shoulde be leuyed within two Shiers in Englande let them use no further reagard in the choice then of ordinary they ar accustomted: In the seruice of the Prince, let these Archers be apoynted with such liuery Bowes as the Country generally useth to alow, let these Archers continnewe in the feelde but the space of one weeke, abidynge such fortune of weather, with their Bowes and Arrowes, as in the mene time might happen. I would but demaunde how many of those thowsand men were able at the weeks end to shoote aboue x. score. I dare undertake that if one hundred of those thousande doo shoote aboue ten score, that .ii. hundred of the rest, wyll shoote shorte of .ix. score, and is not this a peece of aduantage thinkest thou? when euery Calyuer that is brought into the feelde wyl carry a shot xviii. score and .xx. score, and euery Musquet .xxiiii, and xxx. score.
...
And yet if there were no other aduantage to be used in skirmishe, but who can shoote fastest he that is a ready shoote I dare say, would be loth that an Archer should shoots aboue .viii times to his .v

You can find more here if you're so inclined: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A10718.0001.001/1:8?rgn=div1;view=fulltext
And shooting a bow that many times is tiring, something heavily overlooked.

I disagree with this sentiment:

At the scale and manpower (rarely more than two dozen men total) most RPGs take place at, this renders the firearm something used once for the opening volley that is then either a: used as a melee weapon (either a club or spear with bayonet) b: ditched for a melee weapon and/or c: ditched for another gun. Being a secondary arm that's focused on burst damage is a perfectly valid combat niche even with bows and crossbows existing.

If they're not in the frontlines, then they'd be just as fine as someone with a bow or a crossbow, no?
If they are on the frontlines, well, I can't imagine it would be easy to shoot a bow at someone punching you in the face either. At least muskets have bayonets.

 

[Humbaba]

Well, yes, I assume we're talking about people that are well above the 'average' given the context. Heck, this is a good of place as any to put a morale(or what have you) failure check for it to take longer.

It just seems odd to me that people are entirely OK with crossbows in their fantasy games and think longbowmen were capable of rapid firing volleys, but worry about reload times of muskets.
English longbowmen -- highly trained, surely -- did not fire that much faster than well-trained soldiers using muskets. Apologies to the non-native English speakers for the following,

You can find more here if you're so inclined: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A10718.0001.001/1:8?rgn=div1;view=fulltext
And shooting a bow that many times is tiring, something heavily overlooked.

That's an English longbow though and those things are huge, it's what the pike is to the spear and you don't really imagine an adventurer walking around with a pike either. A Mongol bow for example is much smaller and requires less strength to draw but is about as effective.

 

[rohand]

stuff

Like you said, the thing about early guns is the same when crossbows came up. They require much less training - in times of war the average Joe could be conscripted and given a gun or crossbow.

I haven't seen any RPG that has tried to simulate this "skill delay" attribute when comparing bows with crossbows and guns.

i.e.: Skill value could count much more in accuracy and damage for bows but much less for guns and crossbows, producing a different curve.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I haven't seen any RPG that has tried to simulate this "skill delay" attribute when comparing bows with crossbows and guns.

pillows did, it also differentiated between the time it takes to reload and the time it takes to fire
I suspect a lot of the people who shit on pillows simply didn't understand it. Most of its issues were unrelated to its mechanics.

 

[vota DC]

First time I played Ultima Underworld "mmmmmm missile skill....next time I would pick It, but I need to discover Rocket Launcher location".

 

[Storyfag]

Firearms in fantasy settings is even more decline than psionics.

that's another good reason - guns dilute the setting and make it feel less fantasy.

Warhammer Fantasy would like a word.

 

[PapaPetro]

 

[Lurker47]

I'm confused why this thread was made. He expected a negative reaction to the bait title, then tried to argue with someone who didn't show up yet, and then everyone came to just disprove most of what he said immediately?

The only problem I have is that it makes bows seem kind of quaint. But given how it's fantasy, superhuman strength and reflexes, weapon proclivity, and magicks can kind lower the efficiency gap.
(I think an ideal fantasy world should have most things categorized into its religions (races and weapons) to give it that everpresent fantasy grounding and sort of as a metaphor for its fantasy roots and story-telling conventions. With this, we end up with the curious idea that there's a Gun God out there- presumably Uncle Sam.)

 

[Darth Canoli]

I'm confused why this thread was made. He expected a negative reaction to the bait title, then tried to argue with someone who didn't show up yet, and then everyone came to just disprove most of what he said immediately?

The only problem I have is that it makes bows seem kind of quaint. But given how it's fantasy, superhuman strength and reflexes, weapon proclivity, and magicks can kind lower the efficiency gap.
(I think an ideal fantasy world should have most things categorized into its religions (races and weapons) to give it that everpresent fantasy grounding and sort of as a metaphor for its fantasy roots and story-telling conventions. With this, we end up with the curious idea that there's a Gun God out there- presumably Uncle Sam.)

Well said.

Guns well designed in one good fantasy RPG: Incline!
Guns in every fucking fantasy RPG: Decline!

 

[Lurker47]

I'm confused why this thread was made. He expected a negative reaction to the bait title, then tried to argue with someone who didn't show up yet, and then everyone came to just disprove most of what he said immediately?

The only problem I have is that it makes bows seem kind of quaint. But given how it's fantasy, superhuman strength and reflexes, weapon proclivity, and magicks can kind lower the efficiency gap.
(I think an ideal fantasy world should have most things categorized into its religions (races and weapons) to give it that everpresent fantasy grounding and sort of as a metaphor for its fantasy roots and story-telling conventions. With this, we end up with the curious idea that there's a Gun God out there- presumably Uncle Sam.)

Well said.

Guns well designed in one good fantasy RPG: Incline!
Guns in every fucking fantasy RPG: Decline!

I think the kind of world that makes guns a bad thing for its setting isn't exactly suited to being a good fantasy setting in the first place.

 

[Nortar]

That's an English longbow though and those things are huge, it's what the pike is to the spear and you don't really imagine an adventurer walking around with a pike either. A Mongol bow for example is much smaller and requires less strength to draw but is about as effective.

Regarding "required less strength", I heard a different opinion.
It was possible to pull and hold an "English longbow", it's long shaft with longer shoulder made that possible.
The short Mongol bow could only be pulled and shot in a single yanking motion, there was no holding that thing bent at the ready.
I have no dog in this fight, so just some different pov.

As for lack of guns in fantasy, I guess it would take additional work to make setting's verisimilitude and consistentsy intact,
as widely spread firearms would make heavy armor and melee weapons obsolete, just like it happed in the real world.

 

[Humbaba]

I'm confused why this thread was made. He expected a negative reaction to the bait title, then tried to argue with someone who didn't show up yet, and then everyone came to just disprove most of what he said immediately?

You see, RPG Codex is something that's called a forum. In a forum people are encouraged to have discussions on certain topics and - get ready for this one - agree or even DISAGREE with each other. Crazy right? Hope this helps.

 

[JarlFrank]

guns did not exist in medieval Europe.

The first handgonnes for which we have definite evidence appeared in the 1320s, so we can say that the gunpowder age's earliest days begin in 1300.

To put in in perspective, the Byzantine Empire was to continue existing for 150 more years at that point, America would not be discovered until 200 years later, Lithuania was still a Pagan country in mostly-Christian Europe, the era of the Crusades had barely come to an and (and there were still some minor crusading movements in the 1300s), the Mongol horde still existed and was a threat in some parts of the world, etc etc.

If you want the peak late medieval knight in full plate armor wielding a massive two-handed sword and riding a mighty warhorse bred for battle... you also need early handguns.

If this guy exists:

then gunpowder exists too.

If gunpowder does not exist, then your knights should look like this:

 

[Humbaba]

That's an English longbow though and those things are huge, it's what the pike is to the spear and you don't really imagine an adventurer walking around with a pike either. A Mongol bow for example is much smaller and requires less strength to draw but is about as effective.

Regarding "required less strength", I heard a different opinion.
It was possible to pull and hold an "English longbow", it's long shaft with longer shoulder made that possible.
The short Mongol bow could only be pulled and shot in a single yanking motion, there was no holding that thing bent at the ready.
I have no dog in this fight, so just some different pov.

As for lack of guns in fantasy, I guess it would take additional work to make setting's verisimilitude and consistentsy intact,
as widely spread firearms would make heavy armor and melee weapons obsolete, just like it happed in the real world.

This guy holds it quite fine imo.

 

[Humbaba]

guns did not exist in medieval Europe.

The first handgonnes for which we have definite evidence appeared in the 1320s, so we can say that the gunpowder age's earliest days begin in 1300.

To put in in perspective, the Byzantine Empire was to continue existing for 150 more years at that point, America would not be discovered until 200 years later, Lithuania was still a Pagan country in mostly-Christian Europe, the era of the Crusades had barely come to an and (and there were still some minor crusading movements in the 1300s), the Mongol horde still existed and was a threat in some parts of the world, etc etc.

If you want the peak late medieval knight in full plate armor wielding a massive two-handed sword and riding a mighty warhorse bred for battle... you also need early handguns.

If this guy exists:

then gunpowder exists too.

If gunpowder does not exist, then your knights should look like this:

Don't need to go back to handgonne time either to get knights. In the age of the wheellock you had cuirassiers

Plate armor also didn't become obsolete that quickly either, plate of that period was made bulletproof.

 

[JarlFrank]

Man cuirassiers with long pistols just have the coolest fucking optics.

16th and 17th century weapons and armor are so underrated. Peak aesthetics.

 

[Humbaba]

Man cuirassiers with long pistols just have the coolest fucking optics.

16th and 17th century weapons and armor are so underrated. Peak aesthetics.

Don't forget the D R I P

>tfw when no codpiece in 2021

EDIT: This fucking shit better load now

 

[rusty_shackleford]

you will never get to see a pike and shot formation irl

 

[Lurker47]

I'm confused why this thread was made. He expected a negative reaction to the bait title, then tried to argue with someone who didn't show up yet, and then everyone came to just disprove most of what he said immediately?

You see, RPG Codex is something that's called a forum. In a forum people are encouraged to have discussions on certain topics and - get ready for this one - agree or even DISAGREE with each other. Crazy right? Hope this helps.

It's more about the exact process you went about it that makes it confusing. It's titled "Why so few guns in fantasy RPG's" instead of "Why I don't think guns work in fantasy RPG's" and you acknowledge that reason.

 

[Humbaba]

It's more about the exact process you went about it that makes it confusing. It's titled "Why so few guns in fantasy RPG's" instead of "Why I don't think guns work in fantasy RPG's" and you acknowledge that reason.

You're the only one who's confused though.
>Location: Texas
Checks out lol

 

[JamesDixon]

I'm confused why this thread was made. He expected a negative reaction to the bait title, then tried to argue with someone who didn't show up yet, and then everyone came to just disprove most of what he said immediately?

You see, RPG Codex is something that's called a forum. In a forum people are encouraged to have discussions on certain topics and - get ready for this one - agree or even DISAGREE with each other. Crazy right? Hope this helps.

It's more about the exact process you went about it that makes it confusing. It's titled "Why so few guns in fantasy RPG's" instead of "Why I don't think guns work in fantasy RPG's" and you acknowledge that reason.

Now you see why I have him blocked. He argues in bad faith then proceeds to never concede. Hence my reply to this thread. He did it to me plenty of times in other threads.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Guns in RPGs — along with many other non traditional fantasy elements — used to be a lot more common before fantasy RPGs became formulaic.

 

[Lurker47]

It's more about the exact process you went about it that makes it confusing. It's titled "Why so few guns in fantasy RPG's" instead of "Why I don't think guns work in fantasy RPG's" and you acknowledge that reason.

You're the only one who's confused though.
>Location: Texas
Checks out lol

I'm confused why this thread was made. He expected a negative reaction to the bait title, then tried to argue with someone who didn't show up yet, and then everyone came to just disprove most of what he said immediately?

You see, RPG Codex is something that's called a forum. In a forum people are encouraged to have discussions on certain topics and - get ready for this one - agree or even DISAGREE with each other. Crazy right? Hope this helps.

It's more about the exact process you went about it that makes it confusing. It's titled "Why so few guns in fantasy RPG's" instead of "Why I don't think guns work in fantasy RPG's" and you acknowledge that reason.

Now you see why I have him blocked. He argues in bad faith then proceeds to never concede. Hence my reply to this thread. He did it to me plenty of times in other threads.

He can't keep getting away with this.