Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Haltherrion" data-source="post: 5399490" data-attributes="member: 18253">Okay, I'll take your word on it. I don't recall saying you did but if you read it that way, I apologize.  I've been dealing with multiple, different objections to my posts from different people. Some have argued firearms have little change, some have argued there is nothing wrong with reskinning other weapons as firearms, others have made it clear that they have put some thought into these impacts, others tell me (I think) I'm not being imaginative enough if I don't have them. My posts sometimes address more than one objection and its hard to keep the crossfire straight <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  Certainly, few weapon systems immediately replace another. But during this period of co-existence, they rapidly evolved from a somewhat ineffective peripheral system to the core weapon systems in armies. Were the first guns more advanced? Arguable. Were the latter ones more advanced? Seems clear to me. Maybe we mean different things when we say advanced. Given that on Earth no one uses bows for military or law enforcement purposes anymore and they use guns, it seems there must be some differences between the two worthy of note.  Always thought Brilliant energy weapons were analogs to light sabers myself. Also thought that in 3.5 they ignored armor. That's pretty different from a sword. Perhaps I recall differently but in any case, not sure what your point is. The brilliant energy weapon is treated very differently than a sword. Not sure why it matters whether it ought to be treated differently than a light sabre (assuming that is the better analog than laser weapon) but if you really did mean laser weapon, seems like in Star Wars blasters (laser weapon standin) were different from light sabres so sure, treat them differently <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  I feel I've done nothing but try to clearly explain where and why I view firearms as I do. At this point, I think we'll have to simply note the differences and move on. Oopsie. Never read it; thought someone said it did.    Here's how I think it would be a problem with the gamers I play with: <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">If I did not treat firearms sufficiently differently, each use or each time the setting did not account for them (say in castle design), my players would have a reasonable chance of starting a discussion on why it should be different. That's wasted session time in my book.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">A subset of my players would question my judgement as a referee in other areas if I ignored things about firearms that they thought were obvious.</li> </ol>Some folks may not care about either of these points or may not have these issues with their players so YMMV.</blockquote>

Verification