When you think about it shouldn't a fantasy world get gunpowder

What about printing presses or tractors or computers?

Why are people so obsessed with firearms in fantasy?

>>54466158
People have this weird cognitive defect where they think that once the first guy creates blackpowder magic will start to go away and everything will become hard physics.
Probably because of decades of technology kills magic and magic goes away cookie cutter plotlines

>>54466120
I think that in a fantasy setting that mages and alchemists would kind of out-class firearms, also nobility might make it a suppressed technology given the relative low training required to become a rifleman vs. years of training for a mage. I roll with the idea that guns are too intricate for blacksmiths and that only a mage could have the mathematical training to make guns.

>>54466120

It can work however you want it to, because it is a fantasy world. You can define how every single aspect of it works, including things that make no sense in reality. There is no 'Should'. It's all your choice.

>>54467197
my reasoning for this is based off of the reaction from the medieval world when the crossbow was invented. The power that comes from a weapon that at the time required 7 days to become proficient with, and know how to maintain, while it also being long range and able to puncture armour scared a lot of the nobility. I think it was Pope Urban that actually banned it's use against Christians (it didn't stick) as he considered them a crime against God.

File: 1403558570702.png (107KB, 398x450px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 398x450px

>Rifle - requires aiming
>also loading
>also carrying ammo
>also carrying the actual big heavy weapon itself
>please no wind
>the smoke in my eyes hurts
>loud noises
>oh yeah you wanna fight? give me an hour to set up and we'll see whos boss!
>mechanics jammed
>the barrel bent

vs

>magic missile or fire ball
i know what i'd choose.

>>54467029
you have a mental defect if you don't think guns would make magic obsolete

>magic is scary and crazed wizards can bend reality to their will
>magic must be stopped
>guns get invented
>while it takes decades for a wizard to learn spells, it takes months for soldiers to learn how to shoot
>guns are massed produced
>wizards are hunted down and magic is outlawed

>>54467197
>years of training
>implying

Most settings and novels only do days and a month at most for magical training for the experienced adventurer.

>>54467325
>>54467348
you as well

it's like /tg/ is full of tards today

>>54467348
>be a guntard
>screams about gun superiority for free.

If anything, your case look worse thanks to your way of going at it.

>>54467348
It takes seconds for a mage to fill your powder horn with water. Or fill your barrel with small rocks. Or just fire everywhere.

File: GunvsSword.gif (5MB, 400x224px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 400x224px

>>54466158

>>54467348

You really can't see past your personal preferences and biases, can you?

You're choosing for it to work that way. There's no other basis for it. Alternate methods are just as valid, that's just one way you're choosing to imagine it.

>>54467348
Just one spell invalidate your entire army and destroy them.

Mass Heat Metal.

>>54467389
nice rebuttal, really proved me wrong

some anon mentioned how crossbows permanently changed the face of warfare in such a short time, guns would be no different in a fantasy setting. accessibility to magic should be low in order to have a believable and respectable setting and the mass production of guns in tandem with how quickly people can learn to shoot and maintain guns in comparison to years of study, practice, and tutelage of magic- it's a no brainer

>>54467436

>If I make all these assumptions about how things work, things will go the way I say they do!

>>54467404
it takes seconds for a mage to be shot down by 30 riflemen

>>54467421
can you cast "mass heat metal" on hundreds of soldiers at one moment?

>>54467436
Crossbows didn't change the face of warfare for literally almost a thousand years after their introduction.
Guns didn't invalidate anything for hundreds of years (Bows, guns, swords, and spears were on the same fields for a looooong time), and then didn't supplant all other forms of weaponry for another few hundred. The turn of the 19th century was when firearms well and truly took over and relegated all other weapons to niche use at best.

File: 1435368876277.png (393KB, 696x717px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 696x717px

>mfw the fantasy setting has rifles
>mfw the rifles don't use gunpowder
>mfw the rifles are a sort of railgun using magical metal strips within the barrel to propel the round and/or pulse of magical energy

>>54467445
and yet you've not brought a single rebuttal to the table

it's common sense that something wonderful like magic is only wonderful in that it's rare. if everyone can fart fireballs then magic has no value, therefore your setting becomes boring

>>54466120
Usually the idea is they never progress because magic trumps tech, so they stop trying to invent things without using magic.

>>54467498

There's nothing to rebut. You're making assertions without justification or argument, and acting as if repeating them is enough to make them true.

>>54467468
>riflemen
Hah, you think handgonnes are that quick? No, you have to load them on site and they're finicky and inaccurate. By the time you've got your powder out, the mage has already done something to render it useless. All it takes is a little bit of water for early guns to be worthless.

>>54467481
guns invalided shields, bows, and plate armor, what are you talking about? entirely new formations had to be created in order to use and counter firearms

>>54467512
do you not realize that guns were loaded before fights? and that there's usually several lines of riflemen so that when one line fires, the next is ready to shoot?

>>54467540

Eventually. All of them coexisted for centuries.

>>54467468

Early guns were almost worthless beyond 100m.

And spells like protection form missiles exist.

>>54467540
No? Shields were already on the way out because armor was good enough that using two hands on the weapon was better.
The term bulletproof comes from armor literally being proven bullet resistant by the smith shooting it. The proof is the tiny dent created by that act, as opposed to a hole.
Bows, meanwhile, had greater range and still worked in bad weather. They were on the same battlefields most of the time.

>>54467512
>>54467560
additionally, how many soldiers can a mage target at once? with guns being mass produced, he'd be outnumbered by the hundreds

>>54467540

Plate armor was invented later than guns you fucking idiot.

tech develop slower if magic makes life easier

>>54467560
Handgonnes weren't. And multiple ranks firing and loading in alternate patterns was a relatively advanced tactic that was not in use with early guns.

>>54467498

What would be the point of rebutting a personal opinion? These are assumptions about a setting no one has brought into consideration other than yourself based on the vague notion (that you keep insisting) that the introduction of firearms would upset the very existence of magic within this setting of yours.

>>54467491
This is how you do it. If you want guns in your setting, but don't want to make it feel modern, make them magic railguns.

>>54467569
bulletproof armor was also quickly invalidated when the powder and the designs for guns got better. also, the only shields worth using were bucklers, and those were mostly used by civilians for self defense

>>54467576
Protection from missiles is a relatively easy spell.
Hundreds of men can't fire on one man even if he's out in a huge field. They can't all have a clear line of effect.

If you're literally pitting a bunch of early gunmen against a wizard with no other support on either side, the wizard will usually win because he can just make it rain or create a bullet deflecting shield and then throw a fireball.

File: mcr42art09_ta2.jpg (226KB, 1094x667px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 1094x667px

Read this: https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/MCR/article/view/17669/22312

Early guns were inaccurate. Even rifled ones until minie ball was invented.

And even at close range it was possible to stop musket bullets with good armor.

>>54467587
i never said plate armor wasn't you mongoloid, i'm saying shortly after guns invalidated armor

Warhammer Fantasy still has guns being lethal as heck while still having an important focus on magic.

>>54467628
what makes you think the gunmen would be the only unit type? there would also obviously be cavalry armed with guns and pikemen, etc

>>54467651
So there are multiple wizards then. Some block all incoming ranged attacks, and the rest make it rain so the powder gets wet and is useless. GG.

>>54467619
>bulletproof armor was also quickly invalidated

400 years is quickly? Shit, breastplates were used all the way to World War I.

>>54467663
even if there's a dozen wizards, two dozen wizards, three, guns would be mass produced to the tens of thousands in a matter of years

>>54467665
>breastplates were used all the way to World War I.

with varying affect

File: 1500659264679.jpg (42KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 720x480px

>>54466120
Does anybody have that picture that says "Depends on so many variables that your question boils down into a meaningless inflammatory statement?" or something along those lines.

>>54467361
Ummm, no. Also it would still be a hell of a lot more than the weapons training.

Gun tech would definitely surpass magic but no one would spend 500 years of technological advancement and incredible amounts of resources to get there when a mage is already here.

>>54467711
what if people hate and distrust mages for their immense power? all it would take is one rogue mage to get people worried and start making counters measures for magic users

>>54467685
>guns would be mass produced to the tens of thousands in a matter of years
Funny how that didn't happen irl. If you're arguing that guns and magic have to be against each other, the magic will always win, because early guns were slow, inaccurate, not particularly lethal, easily nulled by weather, and had to be made one at a time. You'd bring your early pre-arquebus guns to a fight and end up unable to use them because the guy you're up against ruined your powder. And that's just basic "summon water". That's not even the stupidly OP shit that some magic users can do in certain settings.

>>54467727
Guns are not that counter, unless you somehow make anti-magic bullets and keep your powder in an anti-magic horn, without using magic yourself to do it.

>>54467348
>wizards are hunted down
Why

Either they ARE the law, or they are used by the law.

Why people have this big boner about empires killing magic and magical beasts I've no idea.

>>54467729
>Funny how that didn't happen irl

except it did, firearms were part of the Ottoman Empire's regular infantry by the late 15th century, and around that time the French knights were stomped by gunmen

>>54467197
>I roll with the idea that guns are too intricate for blacksmiths and that only a mage could have the mathematical training to make guns.
dunno about personal firearms, but when it comes to cannons, if you know how to make a church bell you already know most of what's needed to make a primitive cannon

also on the guns vs magic debate I prefer the middle route where both options have merits and don't obsolete each other just by existing, and indeed can complement each other very well in the right circumstances(like say a Mage in the military keeping a couple pistols on his person so he doesn't have to use up slots on Magic Missile, or a sniper who has some enchanted ammo to increase his effectiveness)

>>54467481
>The turn of the 19th century was when firearms well and truly took over and relegated all other weapons to niche use at best.
honestly even then other weapons maintained at least some relevance up through WW1

>>54467790
That's not true. French knights were being stomped by many things.

>>54467790
>late 15th century
Centuries after the advent of guns, one empire had them as part of their regular infantry equipment.
That's not mass produced by the tens of thousands in a matter of years. That's mass produced by the thousands in a matter of centuries.

>>54467821
Chinese had them in regular infantry way beforehand, then.

>>54467837
Although I admit to a large extent the Chinese don't count.

>>54467837
The Chinese also used many other weapons at the same time, and still didn't mass produce them in the tens of thousands within a few years.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (71KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1920x1080px

>>54467348
Really cute this "musket" of yours.
Now kill pic related with it.

If anything the muggles fuck yeah people would be outlawed when anyone witb two neurons to rub together realizes you need magic to kill the ancient evil of the month.

>>54467858
>w-what? Guns might hurt my wizards?
>well they summon huge eldritch monsters now!
This infinity plus one shield stuff is pathetic. Just acknowledge that different settings work differently.

>>54467348
Take a good look at Pathfinder, where wild west tier guns exist, and come back here

>>54467892
No one should be made to look at Pathfinder.

>>54467228
The problem is I have a bunch of pedantic assholes in my group with one insufferable tool in particular who doesn't do well with "I don't care I like it and thought it was cool" when it inconveniences him.

>>54467348
"Protection from Mundane Missiles".
What now?

File: magic missile.jpg (67KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1280x720px

>>54466120
The thing is, even if Guns replace magic in terms of commonality on the battlefield as a weapon, they would not replace magic for all the other aspects of both life and warfare. Mass communication, scrying, resource manufacture, transportation, terrain alteration, visibility cover, defensive cover, illumination, crowd control, healing and triage, spying and counter-intelligence, illusions to hide troop placement, troop morale/performance enhancers, weapon enhancement/enchantment (now you can turn shitty flintlocks into magic sniper rifles for specialists), weather manipulation, cover creation, smokescreens, enhancements to cavelry such as magically created mounts, quick troop creation, siege warfare, etc.

And tha's only the military application. Next you have to conside how the existance of magic and magical items will effect the economy, how their supply and demand will be determined, who has the right to create and sell magical items, rates for wizards to charge magical services and how that in turn affects auxiliary markets, item availablility, political sway the mages and potential guilds my have, overall quality of life for the citizenry, how pay rates will be altered by this market, how magic will effect safety and worksman benefits, corporate espionage, the potential cost of automation with golems vs traditional workers, and the millions of other factors.

Heck, even with some basic maical spells and effects, society and the needs of it can be changed drastically if not addressed by an in-universe reasons. Decanter's of Endless Water, Pearls of Purity, Create Food and Drink, Rings of Sustanance all majorly effect basic resource needs of people, and all that you need to created a near-perpetual electric generator is a simple Ring of Gates pair, which a smart wizard would black-box, patent, and sell to people and live as a rich fatcat from his royalties, rent/use fees, and occasional maintainance fees.

Guns won't erase magic, they'll complement it

>>54467875
They really don't need infinity plus one shields. They just need the standard shields that they usually have and literally any kind of water producing magic. Until the advent of self contained cartridges, rain was literally the number one cause of gun failure, because you can't light wet powder. Tons and tons of innovations were made, just to prevent that stuff from getting wet from wax sealed storage to literal umbrellas that you prop up when you want to fire, and it still got wet and useless regularly.

>>54467928
You seem to be ignoring that guns will have magic on their side, too.

>>54467197
alchemists are probably a big question here.

If alchemist and potion makers are doing the type of things that might lead them to discovering gunpowder, then having more of them and with more resources means you'd get gunpowder sooner.

But if the people messing with chemicals and such are more focused on magical properties and plants and such, then there wouldn't be people who would mix together gunpowder.

So yeah, as should be, dependent on the setting and how magic works in it.

>>54467962
Nope. Gun-guys will kill all the stinky wizzards

Well in my setting atomic reactions are themselves a form of "mundane" magic so suck it all of you.

Guns are special because they are not special.

>>54466120
Technological progress isn't an even distribution over time & space, or motivated by maximization of efficiency. Guns in the early modern era, while becoming a significant part of pike & shot, were still a combined arms force with cavalry charges and push-of-the-pike being a deciding factor in many battles.

The speed of adoption, spread of use and cultural production around guns is basically up to you if there's magic. Shit's magic. Looking at historical references can give you a rough idea to base things off of, but for what its worth, unless your campaign is somehow based around the exact point where modernism really starts being a thing, its not terribly important to be overly consistent. Its more than likely putting too much emphasis on detail will make things less interesting, less engaging, and less realistic given how often humans fuck up our own logistics.

Rules wise I think people have a hard time with it because of making combat overly granular time measurements and getting autistic about it, but that's opinions. Somewhere there are people having a blast playing phoenix command, and like, go for it. But damn.

>>54467795
Generally I've not encountered the cannon issue before. I'm used to settings not at full warfare, usually things like adventurer driven worlds keeps things small scale but with events with high power. Rarely do you see an army being the threat, it's usually the dude at the top that's the real threat.

>>54467962
this raises question as well.

I've been working on a fantasy setting with early modern era guns (ie muskets and pistols are just starting to be worked with, most guns very heavy and slow to load, and expensive).

And part of it, to make it fun for players, was that magic was being used to shortcut into more advanced guns, but those were thus very rare as they required very skilled enchanters to make.

So you can find light rifled muskets, but maybe 100 of those get made a year.
There are 2 revolvers. and only one person knows how to make the cartridges for it and can make maybe 50 a year.

>>54467901
BEST POST

>>54467989
see>>54467924
Every general worth his salt will realize that killin wizards is the dumbest idea ever, and court-martial any retard gun-luddite who tries to attack a wizard, that is if the Wizard isn't already wearing his magically enchanted Kevlar-like robe, hasn't prepared his combat-prescience spells to see the attack coming, and doesn't just drop you open a whole in the ground underneath you and bury you alive with a simple pit spell, or uses an entanglement spell just to look you in the eye before he whips out his magic never-wet gun loaded with seeking bullets and shots you right between the eyes.

You keep assuming that guns and magic are mutually exclusive, when any intelligent wizard/battlemage will see guns and immediately set about improving them and using them himself to his own benefit.

And this is why Harry Potter is poorly world-built for modern-day wizards

>>54467962
The premise so far has been that guns are invented, advanced, and used to wipe magic out.
So no they won't have magic on their side.

>>54467988
That's why in a high magic society I figured it would be a banned technology. Realistically thinking firearms are an end product and not a process for making anything else so in theory it would be easy to suppress it. Low magic it would take over, but I would imagine that mages suddenly become a commodity and become part of the ruling class, similar to how FMA has alchemists (albeit very different ones to what we're talking about) that if they meet the power requirement become part of the military and are given a lot of authority to keep them on-side.

>>54468078
In Harry Potter, a man with a shotgun will win if he can shoot before the wizard whips his wand around. It all comes down to who shoots first.

>>54467711
>Gun tech would definitely surpass magic

Gun tech would surpass shit like Meteor Swarm?

Warhammer has guns. It has flamethrowers, steam tanks and gyrocopters. Mages still rule battlegrounds.

>>54467560
False on both counts. Keeping a gun loaded, particularly early ones was bad for the gun leading to possibly lethal misfires. Second the first to use proper rank fire was fucking Napoleon. Nobunaga used ranked fire over a hundred years prior, but he had no interaction with Europe. Between horrendous accuracy and shit reload times and inefficiency there isn't much chance of guns outstripping a good mage enough to actually make them outdated.

>>54468078
this guy >>54468066
here.

So as said, depends on how magic works. A big thing for the setting I was working on is that magic gets much harder as you go from enchance>shift>block>create (the last being near impossible).

Also that human magic is much better at working at the time than being stored.

So magicians are very useful in armies, but are often supporting the artillery teams, enchancing and guiding the shots. Or to a lesser extent the arquebus, but there they spend more effort guiding and enchancing the soldiers and officers focus and resolve.

The fact that women are just slightly better as magicians (on average) than men, meant that while officers and infantry are still all male, auxillary positions became coed.

Oh. Are we secretly in a magic vs technology powerlevel thread?

>>54468078
Nope. Anyone willing to work with mages is a traitor and unworthy of his gun.
The true heroes of science will kill up to the last magician, witch and demonologist.

>>54467348
>implying guns aren't magic

I made a squeezing motion with a finger and that guy is spraying blood. Tell me that's not magic.

>>54468175
>arguing with people who think guns suddently changed everything, despite the fact firearms coexisted with everything else up to the 19th century at the very least

>>54468168
except in warhammer mage fire didn't make up the majority of the firepower (okay there were bits on the tabletop where the magic rules got out of hand but whatever), they were too rare and only the bright mages were all about the blasting.
Most wizards were used as supporting roles, enchancing and debuffing troops which could be fielded in larger numbers.

>>54468066
Sounds good for guns just starting to appear in a magical world. Perhaps the government could sponsor a local mage's guild, or make their own Enchanter assembly line to quickly enchant multiple rifles at once usig apprentices who each know one enchantment each, and meanwhile the kingdom will also fund apprentices to try to learn and assits the Revolver Wizard or both making them, learning their production, as well as possible research grant money to help fund further arcane research in refining and improving the technique. Add in federally contracted materil wizards and such, and eventually you'll ave Wild West level guns and usage in approximately 1-2 generations

>>54468117
Unless you have an in-universe reason for uns not working in the hands of anyone with magic abilities, this is impossible and is shity writing that only a middle-schooler who got an F in English would think is good

>>54468131
>That's why in a high magic society I figured Archmagister Colt will find a way to apply magic and gunsmithing togetherg together, copywritten under his Mage's Guild Charter, to become rich as fuck and create a new brand of magical war profiteering and alter the face of warfare forever. Eventually Archmagister Colt is able to charter his own Magical Firearms Guild, which is later further improved by the Arclord Browning.
>Years later, Magic/k/ becomes a thing
ftfy

>>54468211
Oh, you're just a retarded roleplayer trying to get (You)s. Carry on then, though this will be the last (You) you get from me.
ftfy

>>54468137
Yet you never see wizards use magic guns, because Rowling as a hack who probably has never even touched a gun in her life

File: K_Munakata1.webm (3MB, 720x404px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 720x404px

>>54467348
>country hunts down it's own wizards
>suddenly evil wizards can do whatever they want
>they can teleport into king's room at night and murder him
>or even better charm him and rule the country
>no countermeasures because you killed all good mages that worked for government
>enemy army with mages invades
>they can call rain or fog and make your guns useless
>or summon monsters immune to mundane weapons

Brilliant.

>>54468248
Vernon points a gun at Hagrid

>>54466120
Magic makes them complacent and ironically, I believe stifles real progress. Instead of inventing and trying to overcome your environment. People tried to go the easy route and break physics.

>>54468303
Yeah they would make zero progression in magic.

>>54468248
That's a bit reductive on my reasoning. Yes that could be a thing, but I would imagine that it being restricted would be more along the lines of people only knowing at the highest echelons of magic and them actively stamping out anyone who gets close on any part of a firearm. The most important would be the alchemical side given that without that it's a stick that shoots something, like a crossbow or a wand which are existing technology. I mean gunpowder isn't really used for anything else is it? I mean the processes to make it aren't conducive to any other product that I can think of.

File: The_Purple_Sun_of_Xereus.webm (3MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x360px

>>54468235

Is that why spells like Xereus or Dwellers decided battles? Or why in lore many battles were completely decided by mages? Look at Malekith or Teclis. Empire was able to survive Storm of Chaos only because elves lent them mages.

>>54468314
That's because the first guy who got epic spellcasting usurped the god of magic and rewrote the universe to make anyone who tries to upset the status quo explode in a cloud of gore. No save, just die

>>54468248
>Perhaps the government could sponsor a local mage's guild, or make their own Enchanter assembly line to quickly enchant multiple rifles at once usig apprentices who each know one enchantment each
Well part of making the setting was not to have one 'magical race'
so the races are good at magic in various ways.
Humans are great at using words and songs for magic, so most of their magic happens on use, and kinda suck at enchanting.
The elves who are good at enchanting physical things have a psychological problem that makes them not good at innovation. And are weird isolationists living in towers by the major human cities.

So a lot of the best guns are a combination of a specialized gunmaker who can work with enchantments, ordering simple but specialized parts from the elves.
But a lot of what you are talking about does happen.

Like the human rulers of each city have deals with the elves so they trade supplies for so many enchanted gunbarrels, cannon, whatever.

The first adventure going to start with the players at the twice yearly trade fairs at a towers finding out that almost all of the enchanted steel and iron for that year was already sold to the empire. For cannons.
War with the North was coming.

But yeah, it was advancing fast. The last major war (~40 years ago) was the first that guns and cannons with magic had a big part in, defeating an army with more magic but less guns and cannons. Next war will be the first big war between two major gunpowder using powers.

Also check out the Alloy of Law series for a good example of wild west guns with magic.

>>54467790
Dear gods no. Those Janissari guns were far from mass produced. They were works of art that were made special for each man. The men who used them were the special forces of their day.

>>54468303

Most people can't use magic and those people would flock to new technology.

And nothing stops mages from using guns.

>>54468420
>dwellers
well that was the weird imbalanced rules I was talking about.

And those lore battles are about a half dozen wizards possibly, and warhammer loves to focus on the heroes.

battles without those half dozen wizards typically depended more on the celestial wizard giving massive support to gunners, than on them shooting lightning bolts.

>>54468203
In every thread with buttblasted burgers who spend their welfare checks on guns.
So yes, every thread whenever guns are remotely mentioned.

>>54468462
What's to stop level 0s from picking up a level in mage or wizard? basically nothing. Lore-wise it's years of studying but just beat up a few goblins mechanically and you can fucking cast spells. Find a few other fledgling wizards, go adventuring, and you have mass spellcasters.

It's just that most people don't really have a deathwish. Even with magic, adventuring is dangerous

File: fb8a0c1f2f646abe2c93a65bb8dd459c.jpg (1MB, 1200x1694px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1200x1694px

>magic vs guns

You know, smart people would just use both.

>>54468604
>D&D

First of all you need hight Int or Cha score to actually cast spells.

And D&D is a shit system.

>>54468604
Even with guns nowadays, most Americans don't own guns and only a few of those that do use it regularly enough to have skill in it.

>>54468669
Depends on the edition. In early ones, you just needed int 9 or better to be a wizard, and 10-11 was the average.

>>54468669
Other systems have even far shorter time to learn magic to the point of taking just a day or two.

>>54468678
True. Guns however these days are piss easy to use. Even picking it up as a hobby and not practicing super regularly, you can have deadly precision and skill.
>>54468669
Yes, and no. I kinda like the whole "sandbox" you can be whatever you put your mind to I suppose. The restrictions for classes lore-wise have heavy implications but in practicality...not much. I can't stand games which try to put players on a pedestal from the very start by saying "ohh hurr, you're a unique snowflake with amazing potential that no-one else has, now take this shitty fucking stat buy, 8hit points, and go whack some badgers with a stick"

Every humanoid should play by the same rules imo. Or at least, relatively so.

>have cannons but no guns
>have to think of a justification for cannons but no gunpowder
>end up with alchemical containers filled with essentially fantasy super-compressed hydrogen
>These allow muzzle loading (and very fancy breech loading) cannons while avoiding rifles and handgonnes because an explosive charge can't be miniaturized enough to be practical, instead crossbows and advanced spring crossbows are the "high tech" weapon of choice for militaries, (with some regions that lack wood such as the desert making mass-produced Firebolt cantrip staves instead)

>>54468678
>most americans don't have guns
The second point is very, very debatable. But the first one is straight up wrong, at least 54% of american households have at least a single gun and that number is rising and there's more guns than people here.

>>54468749
Well, you won't have "deadly precision and skill" you'll just be a competent marksman on a range, few people train for combat shooting.

It bothers me when people act like firearms are instadeath wands that anybody can pick up and use effectively or they're this mystical hard to use device that requires 24/7 hour practice. It's just easier to learn the fundamentals than a sword or bow, combat marksmanship is more about discipline and steady nerves than traditional marksmanship, an gold medal Olympian shooter can get put into a firefight and miss every shot if they're panicking.

>>54468833
>>54468678
citation either of you?

File: GUNS-IN-OTHER-COUNTRIES-Firearm-Ownership-and-Homicides-Rates-per-Country.png (105KB, 1558x1006px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1558x1006px

>>54468879

>>54468832
once saw a party in 3.5 use launch item to make cannons out of Bags of Holding and Portable Holes. Ripped holes in the universe.

Most people who are shot survive, because they're rushed to a hospital before blood loss gets them. There are only a few small parts of the human body that result in instant death if they are punctured by a bullet.

>>54468949
Anon, if I stab you in the face with a puny dagger, you did die too, dumbfuck.

>>54468931
that doesn't provide info on how many people have guns.
Just guns per person, and given that a single individual can have many guns, it's insufficient to make a conclusion about the % of people who own at least one gun.

>>54468957
Chances are very low that if you stabbed me, I would die from the stab itself. If an ambulance arrives within a half hour, I won't even die from blood loss.
People survive being stabbed repeatedly all over the face and torso.

File: imrs.png (71KB, 480x370px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 480x370px

>>54468962
I will say, apparently the rate of ownership is in fact falling (at least proclaimed ownership) but the number of weapons is in fact rising.

>>54467491
>semi-magical railguns
>not just having an item that automatically attunes wands and removes the need for UMD

My wandslinger lets me use everything from Magic Missile to Fireball to Lightning Bolt. All I gotta do is swap out whatever wand I don't want for one I do and bangzapboom

>>54468973
No, stabs are more lethal than gunshot wounds, gunshot wounds are far more common of course but modern medicine is equipped very well to treat a gunshot, a stab is more likely to kill you than a gunshot.

>>54468987
that's households not people, but closer and probably as good as we'll get.
So 'most american's don't have a gun' has been technically true since the mid 90s, but it's been large majority.

not the greatest source for either, but I'm too lazy to go to PEW.

>>54467348
>magic is scary and crazed wizards can bend reality to their will
>magic must be stopped
So in this example already, you've made a mistake. People with power naturally rise to the top of societies. Magic is power. So either magic users will run the state, or the state will employ them.

>guns get invented
Who benefits first from the arrival of any new technology with a high initial investment? Of course, the people already in power. Guns arrive, the government fields them first. The government is already either made up of or employs magic to its own ends.

>while it takes decades for a wizard to learn spells, it takes months for soldiers to learn how to shoot
>guns are massed produced
>wizards are hunted down and magic is outlawed
How does this follow? A gun literally does what a crossbow does except with more smoke, and wizards are probably already running the government, or are at least affiliated with the state. Why would the state use its new weapon to weaken itself?

What's probable is that if any sort of purge began it would either be because of a political power struggle or because peasants are assmad that magic users are a protected class, it wouldn't really necessitate firearms. In fact, firearms would probably make it harder for such a purge to occur.

Medieval society isn't 18th century America. Guns don't just end up in the hands of peasants en-masse, the aristocracy will virtually always end up with a monopoly on gun-power because they have the money and the expertise to stockpile and train soldiers.

>>54468987
What's the sample size on that? I've never been asked about my guns, and depending on the anonymity of the poll, would say that I don't have them to avoid becoming a target for crackheads looking for things to sell to Jamal for more crack.

>>54467635
Nope. The ability to field lots of men invalidated it.

>>54469058
I'm honestly not sure, but it is a fact that there's roughly about 85-90 guns per person in the US, so either 36% of the people here have a lot of fucking guns (which I doubt) or the all the surveys I can get with a lazy google search are cherry picked, small sample sizes in gun restrictive states or some shit.

>>54468175
>Proper rank fire was Napoleon.

That's wrong.

>>54469058
it could be a shit survey, but first even a bad survey would be anonymous in regards to the published information.
Second, "i've never been asked" is not a sign of a poor sample size. With a population as big as the USA a 2% sampling would be enormous.
The better question is if the sampling is properly random or representative.

>>54469106
> but it is a fact that there's roughly about 85-90 guns per person in the US,
misread the graph on >>54468931
that 85-90 guns per 100 people. Says on the bottom.

>>54469136
>even a bad survey would be anonymous in regards to the published information.
For now. Certain outlets have been petty in the past and show no signs of getting better, and data like names and addresses tends to stick around long after they should be deleted. It might not be a common issue, but it can be an issue.
And I didn't say that me not being asked means it's automatically a bad survey, but sample size and cherrypicked demographics are very common with this kind of thing. Different states and urban densities have vastly different laws and attitudes on guns.

>>54469038
THIS

If you want to have a look at what an established aristocracy does to gun ownership look at the UK. In the UK ,guns were the pursuit of the rich, as it was used in hunting. Hunting for sport was very popular with the rich and with the advent of the 18th century was most hunting in the UK

>>54469241
Which is what I mean, there's more guns than people in america and NICS checks (the background check that everybody has to go through and pass according to US federal law for anons that don't know) have been on the rise. Which begs the question "where are all the guns going?" there's about 40 million more guns than people in the US, which means apparently every Bubba Billy in the deep woods has a fuck ton of guns in his lodge and he keeps buying more.

File: pew gun owership.png (43KB, 310x643px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 310x643px

>>54469241
in this case representative or properly random sampling is much more likely to be the problem than sample size.

anyways went to PEW, who are good at this stuff.

40% for household, 30% for direct ownership.

File: 1497904248565.jpg (34KB, 425x340px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 425x340px

>>54467687

>>54468248
Why would I carry a gun when I can carry a wand that can do everything a gun can and more already?

>>54469340
full methodology is available, but short version is sample size of 3,930 (that's pretty damn big).
Check for distribution upon factors like political lean and urban/rural distribution within the sample.
All of those check out.

>>54468251
if you outlaw magic,
only outlaws will have magic,

>>54469423
To get around spell-wards and silencing spells

Plus, its always good to have a plan B that can catch your enemies off guard. Who would expect Dumbledore to be able to defend himself after whatever that disarming spell is by pulling an uzi out of his robes and blowing someone away.

Only a fool relies on one trick and never keeps an emergency plan.

>>54469540
..that's actually pretty true
That statement goes for almost anything

>>54469274
Guns were all over the place in 18th century Britain. You could easily acquire them and many were very cheap. This was the case up until the 1960s.

>>54471407
not really, guns in the UK have historically been out of the reach financially of 60%+ of people before the 60's. I've done a lot of work on guns as part of my HEMA stuff I've done. Do you have a citation for your statement?

>>54471530
The ubiquitous and widespread use of firearms depicted in historical accounts of highwaymen and other incidents in the 18th century, the immense popularity and rise of rifle and pistol teams for workers in thousands of factories, breweries, collieries, etc and accounts of the gun trade in the 19th and 20th century showing vast numbers of cheap guns being sold during these time periods. It's not collated into a single source or document and I'd have to spend a large amount of time gathering it all up but by and large, if you wanted a gun of some kind, it was possible to acquire one. There used to be a huge firearms culture in this country, although never as big as America's.

The only time I've EVER had widespread guns in a campaign of mine is when there was a town constantly beset by werewolves so the locals had a dwarven smith invent them a weapon that could fire silver projectiles better than a crossbow.

I propose to mass-produce magi scrolls with the help of the printing press.

>>54467404
>It takes seconds for a mage to fill your powder horn with water. Or fill your barrel with small rocks. Or just fire everywhere.

You know, why doesnt this shit fucks with armor and weapons too? Do you have any idea how vulnerable is any kind of weapin of armor to water let alone fire?

>>54467348
Ban assault mages!

File: 19-C-US-bayonets.jpg (92KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 800x600px

This thing is what ended any need to separate marksmen from melee fighters: the humble bayonet.

What's a gun? A staff that shots bullets. What's a staff with a pointy piece of metal at the end? A spear/pike.

I like what Obsidian did with guns (early modern arquebuses, really) in Pillars of Eternity. They're favoured because they can pierce the magical shields conjured by wizards, and that's what makes them special.

Mages in a lot of settings are so broken that they dont make any sense in their own setting.

Take a thing like a permanent massive teleportation spell or a permanent portal. Congratulations, you have just made any form of trade routes between cities obsolete. Caravans no longer make any sense, villages and cities that only exist because they are in an important trade route become obsolete. Etc.

>>54471942
Because every small village has a mage powerful enough to cast mass teleport, and do it for free.

File: 1500754168984.jpg (160KB, 736x851px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 736x851px

You know that hand cannons are a thing, right? You dont need to include something as sophisticated as a matchlock or a musket.

>>54471969

But why do big cities need even villages when you can spawn from from aether?

>>54472035
anon
what

>>54472054

You can spawn food and materials from nothing and energy-free. You dont need villages or farms. Also, why arent your armies full of golems and constructs?

>>54471969
Moist every villiage tends to have at least 1 caster of 1-3 level, and its usually a Cleric or Druid. That's semi-free healthcare and access of basic food and medical aid in case of emergencies! This by its self solves so much of the various resource and health concerns of a villiage, which in turn should significantly alter their dynamic

>>54472092
I guess it depends on the universe but here's my explanation for mine
>Conjured food tastes absolutely heinous and has very little nutritional value
>Golems take a long time to craft and animate, can be expensive, and get totally fucked if even a single enemy soldier can Silence or Disenchant the Golems

A pattern I see in these threads is that people pit high-level 3.5 style wizards, in a setting where they're apparently common enough to be in widespread use by all armies, against common dirt peasants using primitive guns.

>>54472092

The obvious solution is to add a cost to magic. Alchemist components and rare materials. Winds of magic that mages have to pool from and gets consumed, temporalely, with use so two mages on the field share and consume the same pool. Energy-free Vanatian magic with unlimited casting its what causes setting-breaking problems.

>>54472207
Becuase OP never specifies otherwise, and its generally the version of Wizard many of us are most familiar with, and tends to cover enough magical versatility, utility, and capability to be used in the discussion

File: gelt.png (94KB, 176x220px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 176x220px

Wouldnt wizards welcome guns? It sounds to me like they would probe the superiority of their research into alchemy and the forces of nature. Fireball and combat wizards are mindless brutes. Buffing, crafting and enchanting are the real deal.

>>54472004
you know handcannons are kinda pointless, right?

aiming is harder than conor mcgregor

the barrel is short as OPs dick,

wasted powder, could have been used in granados/artillery

tends to be smoothbore, this does wonders for the accuracy

can not have a large powder-charge, b/c recoil

need i go on?,

if you need to kill people, and you have a handcannon, ditch the fail-stick and get a bow/crossbow,

also if you got large amounts of powder, make granados

>>54472870

They were not for marksmen but a supplement. You fire then charge.

>>54471850
Bayonets are as good a compromise as you can get, but at the end of the day it's still just a shittier (read: heavy as fuck and poorly balanced for the stabbing length you get) spear.

If two equally competent dudes squared off in melee, the guy with the dedicated spear weapon would win because it's faster and probably longer.

>>54472954

That doesnt matter in big battles. You dont fight 1 on 1. The ability to have any troop perform both melee and marksmanship simplifies tactics and training.

>>54472951
the most they did was shock and awe, if you have a steady supply of blackpowder get regular cannon/granados,

pike and shot is op and should be nerfed, this is a fact, but using handcannon is simply doing the enemy a favor by wasting good powder

>>54473017
a shitty spear is better that no spear?

also the main selling point of the bayonet was mainely the anti-cavalry effect, charging head first into a line of pointed sticks was never fun for the horse endowed,,, ponies be expensive, and all that

>>54473099

Yes. There's a reason armies got rid of their spearmen as the bayonet gained prominence. Also, a close packed group of spearmen would be slaughtered by the more nimble and mobile artillery post-Gustavus. That's way peoole fought in lines in that era (less vulnerable to artillery).

>>54470039
Antimagic fields don't exist in HP. And anyone who graduated Hogwarts knows how to cast silently, even if it's somewhat harder than casting verbally.

If you've been disarmed, by the time you've pulled out your backup weapon you're going to get stunned/bound with magical ropes/turned into a sea-urchin, since you can't cast a shield. It's probably possible to contrive a situation where a gun would be useful, but since one never happened in the books, I guess we don't know how many wizards might be carrying guns...

>>54473398

J. K. Rowling said that guns kill mages just fine. They are very dangerous to mages.

>>54467411
Except in fantasy that was a flintlock at best and literally your only shot. Hope you hit, hope the crowd doesn't turn on you.

>>54473398
Remember, the most useful defense for a wizard is to literally dodge the magic as it flies towards you, with deflection and shields being secondary. Top tier wizard fighters were ducking and weaving against each other during the big fights. You can't dodge bullets. If a guy with a gun can shoot before the wizard gets their spell on (Or even realizes there's a threat), the guy with the gun wins. Silent, motionless casting is very difficult and often results in weakened spells. Powerful spells also have an emotional requirement to cast effectively, but that's not really relevant, since low-end curses or hexes would end the fight anyway.

>>54473475

Inaccuracy of pre-modern firearms gets exaggerated. They are are no much less accurate than bows. In reality it's a trade off. More accuracy means slower reload and viceversa. It takes longer to reload a ball that matched the barrel over a smaller one. It just happens that volume of fire become more valuable during the Napoleonic era.

>>54467576
Who the fuck is sending literally hundreds of people to try and kill a single wizard? A single wizard who is going to have an incredibly easy time just refusing to engage them.

How are they going to even find the wizard? You have any idea it would be to hide from a small army? Especially when they hate magic and you don't. Like damn. Just teleport away, or just don't advertise where you are with a giant neon magic sign anymore.

This is a fucking logistics nightmare.

File: Luminark.jpg (485KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

485KB, 1920x1080px

Why are you playing this as guns vs magic? If anything mages should embrace guns. Now, you don't need pesky feudal lords to train armies of men. Fireballs you say? Pfff. Any mage that throws fireballs is no better than a brute with a stick.

Unless you have a magic vs technology thing going on or your mages are hippies (perhaps with technology creating anti-magic fields by merely existing), mages should embrace guns. Mages are scientist/alchemist seeking a dominion over the natural and supernatural world.

>>54473638
>Inaccuracy of pre-modern firearms gets exaggerated.
There's still a to hit roll my man. Actually what's the point of your post in general?

>>54467348
All these salty wizard replies

>>54472361
Wizard's don't even welcome pants, they're too stuck on their traditions.

>>54473786
That's because pants interfere with wand waving

File: 572187fd4aca0204378a4a9a39bae4ab.gif (90KB, 512x522px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 512x522px

Chinese repeating crossbow, around 400 BC

I think they'd "develop" slower. Guns had been around for a long time but didnt really get used until they were properly standardized for armies.

So in Fantasy, you'd expect single people or organizations to make breakthroughs, but they'd end up localized because of how unstable most fantasy realms are and how asymmetrical warfare would be.

The rules are simple. No rifling, no bayonets, and locks don't go any further than flintlocks.

Follow these three rules and firearms will never be a problem in your fantasy campaign.

>>54475125
Fuck that, I should be able to kill the archwizard in one shot from 1000 yards away.

File: CasterAndShells.jpg (155KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 640x480px

Why would magic not be used to enhance guns like it does everything else?

>>54475155
You'd need smokeless powder to even get a bullet that far which is late 19th century tech. Well out of the reach of fantasy technology

>>54475284
Unless you enchant it

>>54467348
>implying your "gun" isn't just a fancy wizards wand

TIE HIM UNTO THE STAKE AND CAST FIREWOOD UPON HIM!

>>54475294
What about accuracy though? You've still got a shitty lead ball flying unaerodynamically through the air

>>54467348
Is this what happened in real life

>>54475318

If you don't care about reloading speed, you can match the size of the ball to the barrell. More accuracy in exchange to lower reloading. Bigger chance of misfire, though, but hey! you area wizard.

OP, your entire argument has been lots of people with guns>mage

Arguably, lots of people with pikes and bows still > mage

>>54475318
Fantasy has goddamn seeking arrows. I don't see this being a big issue.

>>54475360
Bullet will be too fast to correct itself unless it's some jfk tier bs

>>54475374
Wait. Are you saying that magic bullets wouldn't be able to correct themselves. Unless, and I think I'm reading you right here.
They're some kind of magic bullets.

Damn that's some insightful shit.

>>54475155
Why such a short range?
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?253910-Maximum-Range-Archery-New-record-distance!

>>54475418
You ever tried to curve something when you throw? The faster it is the less it curves

>>54466120
You need several things for guns to start to compete with magic. That includes the Minié ball, rifling, and the breach mechanism. The first two increase the range of the gun to 400 yards, so without them a wizard just has to stay at a decent distance and cast spells from afar. That would be easy to do on horseback. The last thing significantly increase reloading speed making them on par if not slightly faster than casting magic missiles. Revolutionary and even Napoleonic era guns just aren't advanced enough to compete with magic, it's not until you get to the Civil War tech where they get competitive.

>>54469038
>A gun literally does what a crossbow does except with more smoke

No, a gun can easily pierce a shield wall where as a crossbow will just get lodged and do nothing. This is why they were such a game changer despite having a lower rate of fire.

>>54468704
Source please

>>54475493
Shield walls went out of favor well before firearms became widespread in European warfare, and even shields as a whole had mostly been phased out in favor of 2-handed weapons.

To oversimplify, the from the medieval period to the early modern the dominant force goes
shield wall -> heavy cavalry -> pike squares (with crossbow support) -> pike and shot -> line infantry

>>54466120
>>54466998

File: ItsMagic.jpg (79KB, 720x479px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 720x479px

>>54475433
You're not quite grasping the concept of magic are you?

File: 2222.jpg (504KB, 800x901px) Image search: [Google]

504KB, 800x901px

>>54475468
The setting I'm working on actually has firearms progress as far as the late 19th century. The most technologically advanced military country has eschewed combat magic and has focused on it solely as a means of utility, cosmetics, and espionage. Military issued firearms are brass cartridge based breechloaders, but the standing army isn't as large and powerful as their navy. Common folk are typically stuck with either flint or caplock blunderbuss for hunting. Revolvers using paper cartridges are on the upper price end, and particularly poor folk are left with smoothbore muskets. For these folk ammo and powder are particularly expensive, in addition to maintenance. Getting a big sword or club is cheaper and civilized establishments have you relieve your weapons at the door. Mages, however, already have a number of spells that protect then from physical harm and conventional weaponry, which can only be removed by time or the active dispelling of the magic. The real innovation would come in the form of finding more efficient means of enchanting items for the mass public, since the act of doing so takes a substantial amount of time and resources.

>>54475493
Also crossbows could puncture armour and kill. There are reasons why they were used for centuries in Europe against armoured foes

>>54467784

Exactly. This kinda setting also makes for a really awesome setting, for example FullMetal Alchemist.

>>54477889

Also the Saga of Tanya the Evil.

>>54473882

Was pretty much a joke weapon.

>>54468175
>Second the first to use proper rank fire was fucking Napoleon. Nobunaga used ranked fire over a hundred years prior, but he had no interaction with Europe.
>things which are retarded and also wrong

Japanese learned gunnery from the Dutch, because it was a thing Europeans had been using for centuries. By Napoleon Fire by Rank had been replaced by OTHER systems such as fire by platoon, it was CERTAINLY not anything to do with him.

>>54467784
I think it's trying to play off the irl war against superstition the church had

>>54472361
I'm with you bud. I think they'd do like good old Gelt and make efforts to improve gunpowder effectiveness and so on. No real reason why they wouldn't.

>>54477954
Actually, it enabled peasants with little training to defend the walls of cities and towns. The repeating crossbow was a force multiplier.

>>54477954
http://www.ancient-origins.net/artifacts-other-artifacts/not-shot-dark-how-crossbows-changed-war-ancient-china-005568

>>54468251
This guy gets it.
The power of magic doesn't lie in the ability to blow people up. Destructive magic is peanuts in any realistic scenario when compared to teleportation, scrying and information relay spells, or even basic necromancy.
What in the flying fuck is an army of nonmagical gunslingers gonna do when i release a handfull of incorporeal wraiths on their asses as im half a county away in my lair only accesible by someone with tunnelling spells of teleportation? 3d4 small fire elementals beelining towards their gunpowder stores? A magically conjured skybreak? An invisible assassin going for their commander in chief? Mind control?

Yall fuckers lack imagination.

>>54477899
Tanya's a weird one, because they don't put any effort into the magic. Sure it's flashy, but that's all it is- the magic is just a vehicle to have people do artillery strikes, it doesn't have any broader implications for the the NotEurope setting.

>>54469387
Once again I see this image, and once again I have no bloody idea what's the connection between Four Tankmen and a Dog and that text.

>>54477954
If you were using one repeating crossbow against one target, you would be right. But that was not how they were used. They were fired en masse against an opposing army, in "fire so many bolts that they WILL be hit" style.

>>54467729
Mass production of firearms didn't really start until invention of identical parts and assembly-line practice. Before, most firearms were pretty much oe-off, unique items. There might be traditional "styles" of gunsmithing, taught from master to apprentice.

A gunsmith in New York would probably differ in technique, material choices, appearance of finished product, etc., from a smith in Kentucky, or New Hampshire, or France.

File: 1488581400901.png (94KB, 195x189px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 195x189px

>Firearms could totally defeat magic!
>We should just round up a few hundred humans all armed with cutting-edge technology to murder one single wizard!
>Sure, like, 99% of these humans will die in an attempt, but our soldiers ate totally soulless robots doing what they're told!
>peasants aren't people anyway.
>It is commonly known that fireball is the only spell that exists in any possible setting, there are totally no other spells!
>Now look, if you stack the deck to give gun side every possible advantage and lobotomize the wizard, guns totally will prove better than magic!

File: 1500661196076.gif (2MB, 400x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x240px

What setting are you playing that there are high level wizards all over the place?

What makes medieval conventional weapons so special that they are invulnerable to shit like water/fire/etc spell but leaves firearms vulnerable?

>>54479329
Forgotten Realms

>>54467197
>>54466120
OP, you could possibly check out a fantasy series called the Powder Mage trilogy.

It's "flintlock fantasy" civil war era muskets, pistols, cannons and shit mixed with sort of gaslight era aesthetics and some more "traditional" magic:

1. Minor talents. Might be able to not need sleep, might have perfect memory, whatever.
2. Marked. Powder Mages, they can mentally control, ignite, manipulate gunpowder, including doing a "powder trance" thing that makes them superhumanly fast and strong.
3. Privileged. More classical sorcerers/magic users, they wield spells and shit via pulling power from another dimension. Elemental sort of magic use.

One of the troubles going on in the background is that Privileged are allergic to gunpowder, and powder mages, because they can control gunpowder and bullets to shoot somebody from half a mile away or more, are a big threat to Privileged that they never were before. So there's a rivalry going on.

Main plot is about a coup d'etat by the military. It's not bad.

>>54479869

That's why banning characters above lvl 12th or 9th is a good idea.

>>54479965
Even level 6 wizard or fighter even is well above firearm power level.

>>54479805
They don't require the use of a combustible powder that needs to be ignited, but cannot be ignited when wet.

>>54480006

Water and Fire would utterly ruin armor or swords.

>>54479992

That's only because most fantasy RPGs deal with firearms the way they deal with lots of things that threaten their Medieval Stasis: terror, suspicion, and shitty rules. If you have the option of using a firearm in most games, it probably has one shot that's weaker than a bow, then takes an entire encounter to reload, and is illegal everywhere in-setting in case you didn't get the hint.

>>54480030
Only through constant and extended exposure, unless the water had a retardedly high saline count, and the fire was also retardedly hot

>>54480030
Water might ruin them in the long-term if you don't oil it and remove any rust that builds. Fire might damage the temper and make them brittle in the long-term.
Neither of those issues stop someone from continuing to use it immediately.

Wet powder stops firearms from working as firearms immediately. You can't ignite the powder (And therefore propel the ball or bullet) and it clumps. If it gets wet in the gun itself, you need to wait for it to dry completely and then meticulously wipe it out with a wire brush before you can use it again. If it gets wet in your powder horn, you can't cleanly pour it into the gun and it won't ignite anyway.

>>54480006
To be fair, if Bob the sharpshoot gets hit by a fireball/lighting bolt he will have way worse problema than a melted gun or sharpnel/exploded powder. Likewise Charles the fighter and Duncan the hunter won't care much about their sword and arrow, if in the same situation as Bob.

>>54480065

Because you are going to keep a red-hot sword in your hand. I like the scene were Gandalf just heats up Aragon's sword. No need for fancy spells.

>>54467348
What level of magic are we talking here? Are we talking "pew pew" magic or literally creating your own plane magic?

>>54480006

You can protect combustible powder if water magic is that much of a threat. Even firearms evolved to deal with rain.

>>54480087
Moisure fucks bowstrings something fierce. Bows were carried without the string, on special containers and only set up before fights

>>54480114
Rain was the biggest problem for firearms up until the late 1800s when solid, self contained cartridges became common. Before that, you had to take extra precautions to keep powder dry, that greatly reduced rate of fire because the motions and materials had to be slow and careful, and sometimes reduced the ability for a unit to maneuver, since they had to set up umbrellas or similar contraptions they could work under, which would then have to be taken down for the unit to move along.
There are examples of cartridges a few centuries earlier than their mass adoption, but they were almost always custom jobs made for rich enthusiasts that were very expensive and time consuming to make.

What water spells exist in D&D?

>>54480121
But does it fuck them up to the point where a few drops will prevent them from functioning immediately? I don't think so.

What's stops alchemists and wizards from making water-proff gunpowder?

>>54480186
All the powderfags REEEEEing at them, presumably.

>>54480186
They'd need to create a substance that burns very quickly, even when submerged. It would probably have to be some kind of oil, and then you have to haul around a liquid instead of powder.

And then you're relying on magic to power your firearms.

>>54467348
Are bullets blunt or bladed weapons? Assuming the former, I'm immune m8.

>>54480198
It was the guntards who said magic should be banned and wizards hunted into extinction.
If anything, they would refuse the waterproof powder and shot the alchemist/wizard

>>54480218

So what? Wizards can spawn fire, water, and even food out of your ass. You may as well incorporate magic into firearms technology.

>>54480222
They are missiles.
A second level spell can no-sell entire armies of musketers and cannons.

>>54480233
They've have been arguing this entire thread that guns and magic are anathema.
So if you incorporate magic, you've already lost.

>>54480218
You'd also have to waterproof your guns to prevent your oil from just oozing right out the front or bottom of it, which means waterproofing the whole thing anyway, defeating the point of it.

>>54468211
>Heroes of science
But the scientific method can be applied to magic in most settings. Destroying an entire branch of study would make you the greatest enemy of scholars and braniacs the world over.

File: Arcanum_cover_copy.jpg (40KB, 248x300px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 248x300px

>>54480247

But the thing is, they are not an anathema at all The only setting were guns would be an anathema to magic is a setting were any, ANY piece of technology generates anti-magic fields by merely existing: like Arcanum.

In every other setting, you could bet that magic and alchemy would be incorporated into gunmaking. It may be even wizards the ones who invent gunpowder and have gunsmiths working for them.

File: 1474214221138.jpg (672KB, 930x1158px) Image search: [Google]

672KB, 930x1158px

>>54480166
Aeqious Orb, Hydraulic Push, Create Water, Slipstream, Obsuring mist, Hydraulec Torrent, Geyser, Solid Fog, Tsunami, Control Water, Globe of Tranquil Water, River Whip, Control Weather, Storm of Veangeance, Elemental Body,

>>54480247
Only gunfags have been arguing that. Heck, did you not read that one huge block of text from earlier where that one anon was basically "Wizards running a firearms industry with Archmage Colt" page?

>>54480265
>>54480218
That's assuming mundane materials and nonmagical ones at that. I'm fairy certain that a simple Protection from Water spell placed on a certain mass of powder would be simple enough. Hell, I'd imagine that the army would probably just carry around a few logistics nerds who's whole job is to perform and maintain magical enchantments on their weapons and tools, since equipment maintanance is already a big part of warfare, these guys would fit right in and would make for excellent army serfs and allow for quicker and more efficient maintanance in general thanks to there being enough hands to actually get it done.

>>54467325
>I'n my setting everyone is a wizard!

>>54476217
Do we have a board like /sci/, but for people who aren't bright enough for /sci/?

>Book Ward

School abjuration; Level bard 2, cleric/oracle 2, sorcerer/wizard 2

>CASTING

Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M/DF (a drop of clear oil)

>EFFECT

Range touch
Target one touched object of up to 10 pounds/level
Duration 1 day/level or until discharged (see text)
Saving Throw Will negates; Spell Resistance Yes (harmless)

>DESCRIPTION

As protection from energy, except as noted above and that the spell only protects against acid and fire damage. While the energy protection remains, the item is also completely waterproof (this protection extends to other liquids as well, such as alcohol and oil).

That's a minimum of 30 pounds of blackpowder, made waterproof for at least 1 day, and is low enough level spell to be made into a Wand and used efficiently, so you bet your as the quartermaster is going to grab a couple of these, bought at a premium rate from the commission of the kingdom's Wizard's Guild

>>54480284
The freefolk will never give in on your sorerors ways. Wizards will be shot down and killed to the last man.
Because guns enpower the common folk to stand up against the abuses of the powerful. With a gun peasants will be able to protect their homes and their families. The small guy will protect himself from the big guy and overtrow mages.
To use magic would be to deny this truth.

>>54480592
ur dumb

File: disgust shinjis base.png (93KB, 250x282px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 250x282px

>>54480592
You know you can stop RPing any moment, right? All its doing now is make you look like a huge asshole and a blithering retard. We get it, you love to pretend to be retarded for the sake of laughs, but sadly no one is laughing anymore, and instead you're just coming off as that one autistic kid who's just saying "bazinga" at random intervals because he saw it on TV, thought it was funny, yet doesn't understand the importance of timing in humor because he's an autist.

Seriously, its time to stop. Unless you actually do have autism, no one here thinks this joke still has any mileage left in it in this thread.

>>54466120
>>54467029
Because you can't have technological advancement in a setting that also has magic and shit like dwarves who are masters of engineering because the whole fantasy setting would become a sci-fi setting in a few decades, only a hard deus ex machina can prevent it from happening and if you want to play in a realistic or sci-fi setting then just do that instead.

File: kAMBlMo.jpg (414KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 1024x683px

>he doesn't use matchlocks
>he doesn't make marksmen characters account for rain, and their serpentine, on top of ammo and blackpowder, forcing them to alternate to a bow

>>54467348
It wouldn't make magic obsolete.

Why should using magic as a weapon of war be its primary function? RPGs have spread this idea, but it's not necessary. It wouldn't make the Ark of the Covenant or the Oracle of Delphi obsolete

>>54473475
>Ignoring Indie's 20/15/10/5 BAB.
>Forgetting he's using a Bigsby's +5 Revolver

I'll have to dig up his character sheet but I'm pretty sure Indie get's another +10 to hit from his Feats too.

That level one NPC warrior was doomed as an cultist's temple.

>>54469008

The semi-magical railguns are used by the non-mage soldiers. Battle mages can merely block their shots via magic and call down hellfire.

>>54478509

While the magic in Tanya isn't probably the most interesting, it does show the place magic would have in a modern(ish) setting.


In a world with magic, magic is part of technology so it is treated like any other piece of technology.

>>54480738
>"bazinga"
I fucking hate the word anon. I fucking hate that show. I get the references but it's not funny.

>>54484248
Yes, that's the point of what I just said. What I'm tryin to say is tat the RP fag is just as annoying and obnoxious as some autists saying that word in real life constatly

>>54484364
I get what you said anon, I just wanted to pip in saying that I hated both that word and show. Seriously, why is that show still playing?

>>54466120
Well, I have some of my elves have more advanced firearms than the rest. They prefer it over bows.

>>54473638
I'll just add to this: big part of the reason people think black powder guns were ridiculously inaccurate was because people didn't properly train soldiers to kill back then, so soldiers would miss constantly for psychological reasons.
Later innovations in how to train soldiers got rid of that issue eventually, and effective combat accuracy was drastically multiplied.

File: 600px-FZ_Thompson_closeup.jpg (50KB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 600x338px

>this kills the mage

>>54484446
Because normies find it funny with all its normie humor, and it lets them laugh at nerds while pretending that it helps them know or understand nerds

File: o0800045011623176527.jpg (43KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 800x450px

>>54485553

>>54485553
Why yes, magic items and mystic codes are best suited for killing mages, including the ones bound to guns

>>54467348
Lets say hypothetically I am a King.
I have a number of spell casters in my service that preform all manor of tasks for the kingdom. From the mundane to the extraordinary and everything in between. And I have several units of gunmen who are good at killing my enemies. Tell me why I shouldnt make use of both to kill my enemies and defend my country?

>>54468303
>Magic stiffles creativity
Thats wrong magic opens up a world of possibilities.

>>54468957
Only a cuck would use a puny dagger to stab someone.

>>54484446
I saw a commerical for a spinoff of Sheldon in High School as a 9 year old. The premise seems to be an irritating autist bothers older people. It looks like cancer and the sad part is, it's probably gonna be real successful.

>>54467348
>while it takes decades for a wizard to learn spells, it takes months for soldiers to learn how to shoot
Takes 1 turn/10 seconds to learn a spell from a scroll.

>>54492187

Which is wrong on so many levels. It's Vanatian magic. The way it works is to write most of the spell in the book and leave the last component to for the last. The reason is that spells in Vanatian magic are way to large, so people write down the whole spell in a book except for the last bit.

>>54478709
That's the joke.