Why so few guns in fantasy RPGs?

[Lurker47]

Because swordsman beat all the people with guns. Katanas can cut bullets, you know.

It's hype AND can be used for balancing.

 

[Faarbaute]

My guess is that developers shy away from guns in fantasy because it dosen't fit the cliches that represent fantasy to most poeple.

When you think of guns, it naturally reminds people of the modern world and the themes that go with that. Guns turn into trench warfare, handgranades and industrial mass slaughter.

This is usually at odds with the themes you are trying to portray in, for example, a medieval derivative fantasy adventure.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

My guess is that developers shy away from guns in fantasy because it dosen't fit the cliches that represent fantasy to most poeple.

When you think of guns, it naturally reminds people of the modern world and the themes that go with that. Guns turn into trench warfare, handgranades and industrial mass slaughter.

This is usually at odds with the themes you are trying to portray in, for example, a medieval derivative fantasy adventure.

yea most developers are hacks whose only talent is copying tolkien and gygax, we know
it's the same reason there's barely any non-post apoc sci-fi RPGs: there's no cookie cutter setting to easily rip off of.

 

[Humbaba]

Source?

There's some Arte documentaries if you can understand German or French, i'm not searching for a link and it's probably easy enough to get a good source to confirm they were nomads and never held a city for long.

Arte is a really shit media outlet tbh.

 

[Harthwain]

There's some Arte documentaries if you can understand German or French, i'm not searching for a link and it's probably easy enough to get a good source to confirm they were nomads and never held a city for long.

Mongols never having an empire is news to me. All sources I know of talk about a Mongol Empire and Karakorum is recognized as its capital (although it was established as such by Genghis' successor, Ogedei).

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Because swordsman beat all the people with guns. Katanas can cut bullets, you know.

 

[deuxhero]

Gladius was a pretty shitty sword. Its grip wasn't conductive to efficient stabbing among other issues. There's a reason the Romans ditched it.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Because swordsman beat all the people with guns. Katanas can cut bullets, you know.

But bullets can cut katanas too.

The ultimate weapon would obviously be a gun that fires katanas, which itself can be used as a katana. I guess it'd have to be belt fed, a mag that could hold enough katanas would be impractical. Plus, you obviously want to show off all those shiny katanas.

For urban warfare a shortened carbine version that fires wakazashis would be more practical.

 

[Poseidon00]

But bullets can cut katanas too.

The ultimate weapon would obviously be a gun that fires katanas, which itself can be used as a katana. I guess it'd have to be belt fed, a mag that could hold enough katanas would be impractical. Plus, you obviously want to show off all those shiny katanas.

For urban warfare a shortened carbine version that fires wakazashis would be more practical.

Katanas are FOLDED METAL bro you have no idea

 

[Lurker47]

Because swordsman beat all the people with guns. Katanas can cut bullets, you know.

Hating katanas is as much of a meme as jerking them off. Yes, they were fragile but they were also very sharp. There are way worse weapons in history with far more limited applications.

 

[Darth Canoli]

Hating katanas is as much of a meme as jerking them off. Yes, they were fragile but they were also very sharp. There are way worse weapons in history with far more limited applications.

They were perfectly adapted to eastern armors and fighting style against small parties.
And when more appropriate, they were using spears/halberds and bows...

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

But bullets can cut katanas too.

The ultimate weapon would obviously be a gun that fires katanas, which itself can be used as a katana. I guess it'd have to be belt fed, a mag that could hold enough katanas would be impractical. Plus, you obviously want to show off all those shiny katanas.

For urban warfare a shortened carbine version that fires wakazashis would be more practical.

Katanas are FOLDED METAL bro you have no idea

Dude they fold the metal like 100 times, it's harder than the surface of the sun and can cut through almost any liquid known to man. If you look directly into the center of the blade, you can see it's exactly in the middle. And if you fold something 100 times that's like... a zillion layers of sword. A frigging ZILLION! OF SWORD!!!

My uncle actually works at the katana factory, I get to try the new katanas before the public gets to use them.

 

[Stavrophore]

Because guns had a small timeframe when they could compete with crossbow. Early guns were cumbersome and not suitable for handheld, their rate of fire was pretty bad. Then you had a small timeframe where guns improved with better metalurgy, even despite of lacking flintlock they become on par with crossbows. This generally lasted from 1450-1550, when flintlock was introduced and guns replaced crossbows pretty much. After 1550 guns replaced crossbows completely in western militaries. As you can see its hard to balance them without adhering to specific technological setting in the fantasy game. If i had to introduce guns into a fantasy where crossbows and bows are still a thing i would give them slower rate of fire, but better DR/DT piercing capabilities. Problem with this approach is, that gun would be only used at beginning salvo, if your roll bad and not hit enemy, you switch to crossbow or bow. Much effort but little gameplay. In party based system, its better idea since your melee characters[if they survive enemy gun salvo] could engage characters, so your ranged gun chars can still reload and provide support.

 

[Null Null]

Short answer is: Dungeons & Dragons. CRPGs were basically made so people could play D&D on their PC. A lot of them were D&D with a few changes, except for the actual licensed D&D games. Look at the names of the mixed classes in Ultima 3, where they were trying to adapt as many 1e classes as possible (barbarian, ranger, druid, lark[bard], illusionist?), or the original monsters in Final Fantasy 1 (the 'Eye' was a Bihoruda that was a sphere with little eyestalks on top). Wizardry's elite classes of bishop, samurai, ninja, and lord make a lot more sense when you flip through old Dragon magazines and see how much nerds of that era loved Japanese stuff. We're stuck with a lot of the irrational mechanics like linearly increasing HP and fighting perfectly well at 1 HP from 1977. A lot of these work in game terms (letting parties fight fearsome monsters and have hope until the end), but aren't awfully realistic.

Guns weren't in D&D, so they didn't make it into the fantasy CRPG.

 

[Storyfag]

Problem with this approach is, that gun would be only used at beginning salvo, if your roll bad and not hit enemy, you switch to crossbow or bow.

Only if you allow for infinite inventories. Normally, carrying a crossbow AND a gun would be way too cumbersome. Less so for a bow and a gun, but still.

 

[deuxhero]

And as mentioned previously, you can't really store a pre-modern crossbow loaded. The part holding the string back is very flimsy, trigger entirely unprotected and the steel so low quality (compared to modern steel) it's asking for a horrible malfunction. Any reasonably powerful crossbow (windlass, cranequin) is also going to have a load time comparable to a muzzle loader anyways.

 

[RNGsus]

One cool idea I always had for guns in a fantasy setting is "wizard locks" as an alternative to matchlock, flintlock, percussion lock etc.
Only wizards can use it because there's no mechanism to ignite the powder... wizards use a spark spell to ignite it and go pew, the gun is completely useless to anyone else.

thats a fuggin wand me boy