Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="shadow" data-source="post: 5086128" data-attributes="member: 2182">It's about mythology and romanticismWhat it essentially comes down to is romanticizing the sword.&nbsp; Sure, in real life sword fights were bloody affairs that ended rather quickly.&nbsp; However, there is a huge mythology built around gallant warriors and magic swords.&nbsp; Bows are often similarly romanticized - think about Robin Hood and all the other legendary archers.&nbsp; Firearms, however, don't have the same level of romanticism and legends built around them.&nbsp; (Well, in modern cinema there is &quot;Gun-Fu&quot;, but that is a different genre altogether.)As far as &quot;magic would prevent the development of firearms&quot; goes, I don't think that the argument holds much water.&nbsp; With that logic you could also argue that magic would prevent the development of the longbow. (Why develop a long range weapon that takes quite a bit of strength and training when it's easier and more efficient shoot a fireball?)&nbsp; Besides, since when has D&amp;D been about &quot;realism&quot; or &quot;believability&quot;? If you want to start arguing about how magic would affect the campaign world, you should start with how &quot;raise dead&quot; and &quot;resurrection&quot; spells would affect society psychologically and sociologically.Leaving questions of &quot;realism&quot; aside, I think the real reason is simply the &quot;mythic&quot; and &quot;legendary&quot; status afforded to swords.&nbsp; If you want to emulate the &quot;mythic heroism&quot; genre and leave guns out of the mix, that's fine.&nbsp; If you want a different style of play that includes some firearms, that's fine too.&nbsp; Just don't argue it's a question of &quot;realism&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="shadow, post: 5086128, member: 2182"] [b]It's about mythology and romanticism[/b] What it essentially comes down to is romanticizing the sword. Sure, in real life sword fights were bloody affairs that ended rather quickly. However, there is a huge mythology built around gallant warriors and magic swords. Bows are often similarly romanticized - think about Robin Hood and all the other legendary archers. Firearms, however, don't have the same level of romanticism and legends built around them. (Well, in modern cinema there is "Gun-Fu", but that is a different genre altogether.) As far as "magic would prevent the development of firearms" goes, I don't think that the argument holds much water. With that logic you could also argue that magic would prevent the development of the longbow. (Why develop a long range weapon that takes quite a bit of strength and training when it's easier and more efficient shoot a fireball?) Besides, since when has D&D been about "realism" or "believability"? If you want to start arguing about how magic would affect the campaign world, you should start with how "raise dead" and "resurrection" spells would affect society psychologically and sociologically. Leaving questions of "realism" aside, I think the real reason is simply the "mythic" and "legendary" status afforded to swords. If you want to emulate the "mythic heroism" genre and leave guns out of the mix, that's fine. If you want a different style of play that includes some firearms, that's fine too. Just don't argue it's a question of "realism". [/QUOTE]

Verification