Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ProfessorCirno" data-source="post: 5076626" data-attributes="member: 65637">Lots of people here don't seem to like reading <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown&nbsp; &nbsp; :("&nbsp; data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" />I don't care what the personal history of your campaign is.&nbsp; That's cool.I don't care that you hate guns.&nbsp; That's cool.The issue is when someone whinges about how guns would drastically alter the universe, or that they're totally not historically accurate to D&amp;D medieval world assumptions.Will they allow guns into their game if they're wrong?&nbsp; No, probably not.&nbsp; But stupid and bad logic shouldn't just be welcome with a smile and &quot;Well, that's absolutely correct!&nbsp; I mean it's not, but I totally accept it!&quot;Let's look at one example of a complaint: If I allow guns, there's no reason to have knights.&nbsp; Why is this a bad argument?&nbsp; Because there's nothing there showing how guns would exclude knights.The mark of these arguments is those first three words: &quot;If I allow.&quot;&nbsp; The issue isn't with guns, it's with something different!&nbsp; We could talk until we're blue in the face about plate armor and the origin of &quot;bullet proof&quot; and such, but that's not the issue.&nbsp; &quot;If I allow&quot; is an indicator that says &quot;The following is an excuse&quot;I'm saying, enough with the excuses, just be honest.&nbsp; Say you hate guns in your fantasy games and move on.&nbsp; Stop trying to develop excuses that make no sense.Ben Brown - the problem is, there are no crossbow PrCs.&nbsp; At all.&nbsp; There is literally nothing you can do with a crossbow that you can't do better with a bow.&nbsp; Wait no, you can lie down and give yourself -4 AC with a crossbow, so there's that.&nbsp; Why do people take a crossbow then, if there's nothing good about it?&nbsp; Because it's cool.&nbsp; Why do people go &quot;I'd really like a gun?&quot;&nbsp; Because it's cool.D&amp;D was founded on &quot;Hey, isn't this awesome?&quot;&nbsp; As long as the firearms fit the game's consistency, and there's no reason they can't unless you don't want them to, which is, I see I'm forced to repeat again, perfectly fine, then there's no real reason to bar them.The problem with &quot;Standard D&amp;D&quot; is that, yes, it does get old.&nbsp; When your only option for &quot;ranged guy&quot; is either &quot;Spellcaster&quot; or &quot;Use a bow,&quot; then people get really tired of the same crap repeated.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ProfessorCirno, post: 5076626, member: 65637"] Lots of people here don't seem to like reading :( I don't care what the personal history of your campaign is. That's cool. I don't care that you hate guns. That's cool. The issue is when someone whinges about how guns would drastically alter the universe, or that they're totally not historically accurate to D&D medieval world assumptions. Will they allow guns into their game if they're wrong? No, probably not. But stupid and bad logic shouldn't just be welcome with a smile and "Well, that's absolutely correct! I mean it's not, but I totally accept it!" Let's look at one example of a complaint: If I allow guns, there's no reason to have knights. Why is this a bad argument? Because there's nothing there showing how guns would exclude knights. The mark of these arguments is those first three words: "If I allow." The issue isn't with guns, it's with [I]something different! [/I]We could talk until we're blue in the face about plate armor and the origin of "bullet proof" and such, but that's not the issue. "If I allow" is an indicator that says "The following is an excuse" I'm saying, enough with the excuses, just be honest. Say you hate guns in your fantasy games and [I]move on[/I]. Stop trying to develop excuses that make no sense. Ben Brown - the problem is, there are no crossbow PrCs. At all. There is literally nothing you can do with a crossbow that you can't do better with a bow. Wait no, you can lie down and give yourself -4 AC with a crossbow, so there's that. Why do people take a crossbow then, if there's nothing good about it? Because it's cool. Why do people go "I'd really like a gun?" Because it's cool. D&D was founded on "Hey, isn't this awesome?" As long as the firearms fit the game's consistency, and there's no reason they can't [I]unless you don't want them to, which is, I see I'm forced to repeat again, perfectly fine,[/I] then there's no real reason to bar them. The problem with "Standard D&D" is that, yes, it [B]does[/B] get old. When your only option for "ranged guy" is either "Spellcaster" or "Use a bow," then people get really tired of the same crap repeated. [/QUOTE]

Verification