Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="saviirkad" data-source="post: 9890768" data-attributes="member: 7054355">Really for me and my group, just comes down to whether the world we're playing in has firearms as part of the visual aesthetic of fantasy combat we're going for. I don't particularly care about anachronism where it doesn't conflict with our shared headspace. Like I've heard D&D is often a Renaissance era game, and in that context guns make sense. But a lot of the fantasy worlds we go for is older. And while there are other things that would be anachronistic, they don't have as stark an effect as a gun would. Or it's just easier to reskin. Sure, full body plate in the knight style is contemporaneous, but there's older forms of armor that are full-body as far back as the bronze age. But I don't see the need to reskin a firearm when bows already exist.Now, for games that do have guns, I really don't like the reload or extra damage dice thing that's often included. I'd much rather use bows, crossbows, and guns as analogs of melee weapons. Meaning a 1d12 or 2d6 cap. I get that the reload mechanic is meant to mitigate damage in some way, but personally I think its impact is more deleterious than it merits.As for simulationism, I don't want my combat to have some simulation for one weapon type and none for the others. I'd rather the simulation be upheld through descriptions and roleplay.For example, I don't want a gun to deal more damage than a melee weapon. I shot to the forehead is as fatal as a decapitation, and it doesn't matter if it's a bullet or an arrow that goes clean through that precious brain matter. I'd much rather answer "why did that orc take 20 shots to the chest before dying" the exact same way I answer how that other orc took 20 dagger stabs to the chest.</blockquote>

Verification