Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cap'n Kobold" data-source="post: 9279214" data-attributes="member: 6802951">Is there really a need to make them better than everything else?Just as there is no reason to assume that the 5e heavy crossbow is of the same design and operation as the historical cranequin-cranked arbalest, there is no reason to assume that a 5E gun is of the same design or operation as a historical musket. The rate of fire for both would indicate not.&nbsp;Should it be? &nbsp;I think that people who insist that they want to use guns in D&amp;D want to use them most of the time, rather than fire-and-forget at the start of a fight. And as has already been pointed out, the only limitation to how many times you can fire a slow-loading weapon in D&amp;D is how many you can carry.Well, no. They're not.If you think about it a bit, you can understand why: even after guns had advanced quite far beyond their initial incarnations, people were still using &quot;old historical weapons&quot; alongside them. And using armour against them. The early guns that we are probably talking about were still outperformed by bows even after they had become the standard for military use: gun users and ammunition can be mass-produced. Bowmen and good arrows cannot be. Logistics lead to their adoption by the military, not individual effectiveness.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cap'n Kobold, post: 9279214, member: 6802951"] Is there really a need to make them better than everything else? Just as there is no reason to assume that the 5e heavy crossbow is of the same design and operation as the historical cranequin-cranked arbalest, there is no reason to assume that a 5E gun is of the same design or operation as a historical musket. The rate of fire for both would indicate not. Should it be? I think that people who insist that they want to use guns in D&D want to use them most of the time, rather than fire-and-forget at the start of a fight. And as has already been pointed out, the only limitation to how many times you can fire a slow-loading weapon in D&D is how many you can carry. Well, no. They're not. If you think about it a bit, you can understand why: even after guns had advanced quite far beyond their initial incarnations, people were still using "old historical weapons" alongside them. And using armour against them. The early guns that we are probably talking about were still outperformed by bows even after they had become the standard for military use: gun users and ammunition can be mass-produced. Bowmen and good arrows cannot be. Logistics lead to their adoption by the military, not individual effectiveness. [/QUOTE]

Verification