Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Haltherrion" data-source="post: 5398839" data-attributes="member: 18253">It begs the question, why have them at all if they aren't actually treated differently? Especially since some players will ask legitimate questions as to why they aren't treated differently and why they can't use gunpowder itself for other purposes. Why not have laser rifles that are also treated exactly like a bow? Why not have a PAK 88mm that is treated like a ballista? Why stop there? Why not a full salvo of an M270 MLRS treated like 12 slingers? I assume at some point you'd find modeling advanced weapon systems as the equivalent of much simpler systems inappropriate. It would seem I find find that point earlier on the technology spectruum than you do. Are you right and I'm wrong? I wouldn't think so any more than the converse can be stated. But am I unreasonable for not liking them to be treated that way? I don't think so. Am I unreasonable for avoiding games that don't meet my needs as gamer? Again, I don't think so. We all invest a lot of time in a campaign; why invest it in one that is continually offending the suspension of disbelief you are willing to accept? As for the game mechanics, I believed I offered my opinion on this exact point some pages ago in this thread, IIRC: the D&D game system isn't designed to span a wide range of weapon capability. I personally don't think it is well designed to handle firearms all that well as do my other players, who as I've said before include a high proportion of engineers and a hunter. If it works for your group, that's fine but this whole thread was about whether one personally likes firearms and gunpowder weapons. I don't and I've tried to give reasonable reasons for it without simplifying or belittling the contrary viewpoint. If you see nothing wrong with treating the firearms as equivalents of non-firearm weapons in your game, go for it. No doubt the firearms you use are considerably more primitive than my examples weapons; they were selected to make a point that there is a spectruum of weapon capability and as setting designers, you have a choice on how to model them and how, if at all, to distinguish them. To recap my own issue with firearms, they introduce some reasonable questions and expectations from the players. If you aren't going to address them, why bother having them? If you do address them, as many have made clear they do in their own settings, and I assume Eberron does as well, then cool. It's purely a matter of aesthetics at that point.</blockquote>

Verification