Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JohnRTroy" data-source="post: 4338273" data-attributes="member: 2732">It's very possible that even with Magic being more studied than the sciences in fantasy worlds, gunpowder and other sidearms would eventually be found.I wrote a sidebar and had Gary Gygax embellish it in Living Fantasy, where we bring up the subject of why most fantasy settings have no guns.The problem with the sidearm is that it changes things significantly in a setting that has it.&nbsp; Realistically, the thing that gunpowder did was make it a lot easier for untrained peasants to easilly be formed into militias.&nbsp; A gun is point and shoot--it takes practice but no where near the same amount of training it took to use a longbow, a lance, a crossbow, etc--or in a fantasy setting anyone who uses magic.&nbsp; The existence of cannons made the standard Castle/Fortress undefendable as well, forcing the Polyhedronal model, and neutralized the effectiveness of most armor.While Magic would alter a pure historical setting, it's not likely as much to change culture, and fits into Feudal Classes.&nbsp; Mages are at least as specialized as Historical Clerics, Sages, and Knights or Archers.&nbsp; The average man couldn't be a mage--it takes a lot of training to become one.&nbsp; And that's assuming the Gygaxian standard of mages being akin to specialized guilds that helped with society--if magic is rarer in your campaign world, it would have even less effect on society.So, it's possible to have firearms, but to have a sense of realism adding firearms would change the world as it did in history, and put an end to the typical quasi-european setting.&nbsp; Which is why you got the &quot;gunpowder is unstable around magic/doesn't explode on this world&quot; type of explaination in various games.This Wikipedia article is a good start.&nbsp; Extrapolate from that and see what would happen.&nbsp; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_warfare" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_warfare</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="JohnRTroy, post: 4338273, member: 2732"] It's very possible that even with Magic being more studied than the sciences in fantasy worlds, gunpowder and other sidearms would eventually be found. I wrote a sidebar and had Gary Gygax embellish it in Living Fantasy, where we bring up the subject of why most fantasy settings have no guns. The problem with the sidearm is that it changes things significantly in a setting that has it. Realistically, the thing that gunpowder did was make it a lot easier for untrained peasants to easilly be formed into militias. A gun is point and shoot--it takes practice but no where near the same amount of training it took to use a longbow, a lance, a crossbow, etc--or in a fantasy setting anyone who uses magic. The existence of cannons made the standard Castle/Fortress undefendable as well, forcing the Polyhedronal model, and neutralized the effectiveness of most armor. While Magic would alter a pure historical setting, it's not likely as much to change culture, and fits into Feudal Classes. Mages are at least as specialized as Historical Clerics, Sages, and Knights or Archers. The average man couldn't be a mage--it takes a lot of training to become one. And that's assuming the Gygaxian standard of mages being akin to specialized guilds that helped with society--if magic is rarer in your campaign world, it would have even less effect on society. So, it's possible to have firearms, but to have a sense of realism adding firearms would change the world as it did in history, and put an end to the typical quasi-european setting. Which is why you got the "gunpowder is unstable around magic/doesn't explode on this world" type of explaination in various games. This Wikipedia article is a good start. Extrapolate from that and see what would happen. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_warfare[/url] [/QUOTE]

Verification