Your View: Implementing Firearms

[bungo 3965]

i think we should have cannons at the very least we can live without muskets

[Seliyne 196]

The rule of thumb is "can we trust the average player to not **** up using this".

 

If magic requires a year to get to that level, then...

 

No firearms please.

 

EDIT:  I remember writing and implementing lore that made gunpowder impossible to make. What happened to that?

[Ambduscias 1028]

3 hours ago, Tarian said:

The rule of thumb is "can we trust the average player to not **** up using this".

 

If magic requires a year to get to that level, then...

 

No firearms please.

 

EDIT:  I remember writing and implementing lore that made gunpowder impossible to make. What happened to that?

 

Magic doesn't require a year to get to that level nor is there a reasonable equivalency for early gunpowder weaponry to conjuring lightning / elements with several flicks of the wrist.

 

Not to mention the fact that any tool you give players is going to be misused. That isn't a reason to not have said tool in the firstplace, or the server would assuredly be better off with PVP default than any kind of RP mechanic for combat. It's a silly school of thought that fails accrue any weight; using that same argument one could say that having "Your View" threads is entirely pointless, because surely the relevant members of the community will only vote for what currently benefits them??

 

At the end of the day, our experience is what we make of it. The potential (or existence of abuse) is ever present, but it fails to be a legitimate reason to "not have something" begin with, no? 

 

Honestly I haven't seen a reasonable argument against firearms being added in an organic manner. Things such as crossbows, enchanting, and magic are undeniably on the same tier (or stronger), and all this serves to do is make we pleading few more content with our situations.

 

What Swgr is proposing is a literal equivalency. It's nothing special and no sweeping plugin changes are required, so feels just a little silly to me to say no. 

 

((as for cannons issue people argue the gms managing their effects were very clearly misinformed as to their power.))

[Enyahs V. 173]

From the view point of someone who used to be at the front of the canon lore back in Asulon.

 

No.

[Seliyne 196]

4 hours ago, koko haram said:

 

Magic doesn't require a year to get to that level nor is there a reasonable equivalency for early gunpowder weaponry to conjuring lightning / elements with several flicks of the wrist.

 

It still requires an relatively long time to learn in real-life terms - and I can say for a fact that the operation of a musket, no matter how simple or crude it is, is likely still more complex than most any LOTC magic's usage. Sure, you can simplify their RP, but considering that they are basically a finger of god that feels rather powergamey.

 

Quote

 

Not to mention the fact that any tool you give players is going to be misused. That isn't a reason to not have said tool in the firstplace, or the server would assuredly be better off with PVP default than any kind of RP mechanic for combat. It's a silly school of thought that fails accrue any weight; using that same argument one could say that having "Your View" threads is entirely pointless, because surely the relevant members of the community will only vote for what currently benefits them??

 

You're right, except pointing out the elephant in the room doesn't stop it from existing. Firearms are still too powerful and complex for the average player to be trusted to use without causing more harm than good, in my own opinion. If something has more red lines than benefits there's little reason to let it exist.

 

 

Quote

 

At the end of the day, our experience is what we make of it. The potential (or existence of abuse) is ever present, but it fails to be a legitimate reason to "not have something" begin with, no? 

 

Honestly I haven't seen a reasonable argument against firearms being added in an organic manner. Things such as crossbows, enchanting, and magic are undeniably on the same tier (or stronger), and all this serves to do is make we pleading few more content with our situations.

 

My biggest argument against firearms is that they are useless. Apart from in pitched land battles / sieges or maritime conflicts, firearms like muskets and pistols were very rarely used. The only way to make firearms feasible in any form of combat is to allow either semi or full pre-loading, and that's just opening another can of worms, as was seen with preloaded pistol crossbows which got swiftly banned. They are needlessly complex weapons for a server like this (never mind the fact that lore would need to be retconned to allow their existence) and will just complicate combat RP even further than it already is (which is at level that most people cannot engage in without argument or disagreement).

 

This only only made worse by the fact that firearms are extremely repetitive and uncreative to use in combat, no matter how much effort you put into it. This isn't just conjecture, it happened in the past with the White Rose's arbalest fetish - every time they were used in combat it was exactly the same RP - not for lack or want of creativity, oh no, it's simply because every time you use a weapon like that it's quite literally identical RP, the only difference is in who or what you're shooting.

 

 

Quote

 

What Swgr is proposing is a literal equivalency. It's nothing special and no sweeping plugin changes are required, so feels just a little silly to me to say no. 

 

Except that firearms brought about the fall of both the 'Castle Age' and completely changed the face of warfare. Yea, no biggy.

 

 

Quote

 

((as for cannons issue people argue the gms managing their effects were very clearly misinformed as to their power.))

 

Cannons are extremely strong. Consider that a typical trebuchet could fire a large stone ball somewhere in the ballpark of 300 yards with pretty bad accuracy, then consider that a cannon could fire a slightly smaller but metal ball anywhere from 400 to 3000 yards with relatively phenomenal accuracy for the time. This is extremely generalized statistics but it gives you an idea of why castles simply ceased to exist outside of Asia after the 15th century.

 

 

Also, I like firearms a lot. I roleplayed using muskets back during either Asulon or Anthos, and roleplayed golden staves as a form of gun later on. I do enjoy them but I simply think they're unfeasible. 

[Ambduscias 1028]

2 hours ago, Tarian said:

 

It still requires an relatively long time to learn in real-life terms - and I can say for a fact that the operation of a musket, no matter how simple or crude it is, is likely still more complex than most any LOTC magic's usage. Sure, you can simplify their RP, but considering that they are basically a finger of god that feels rather powergamey.

 

I don't think complexity is a reasonable basis to refute the existence of firearms, and we must also look at the fact that what is proposed doesn't need to be something from "reality" as it were. With some thought as to streamlining how to properly manage and balance the issue at hand we probably wouldn't have too much of an issue with that facet.

 

2 hours ago, Tarian said:

 

You're right, except pointing out the elephant in the room doesn't stop it from existing. Firearms are still too powerful and complex for the average player to be trusted to use without causing more harm than good, in my own opinion. If something has more red lines than benefits there's little reason to let it exist.

 

If the benefit is allowing people to have a different type of RP, I don't see the harm. As for the argument of it being too "powerful", there is a reason that firearms weren't instantly prevalent. Platemail was effectively bulletproof, and (reportedly, not going to bother citing scholarly articles when I can eat doritos instead) even conventional breastplates fared well against matchlock firearms. 

 

I fail to grasp what you mean by "complexity" (be it the actual makeup of the weapon and understanding it, or the ability to accurately portray its effects) but in the ideas current iteration it doesn't even speak about any form of regulations (and I'm sure there likely would be, tbh) that could be imposed. If normies can't handle it, I'm sure there is a 

 

2 hours ago, Tarian said:

My biggest argument against firearms is that they are useless. Apart from in pitched battle, firearms like muskets and pistols were very rarely used. The only way to make firearms feasible in any form of combat is to allow either semi or full pre-loading, and that's just opening another can of worms, as was seen with preloaded pistol crossbows which got swiftly banned. They are needlessly complex weapons for a server like this (never mind the fact that lore would need to be retconned to allow their existence) and will just complicate combat RP even further than it already is (which is at level that most people cannot engage in without argument or disagreement).

 

This only only made worse by the fact that firearms are extremely repetitive and uncreative to use in combat, no matter how much effort you put into it. This isn't just conjecture, it happened in the past with the White Rose's arbalest fetish - every time they were used in combat it was exactly the same RP - not for lack or want of creativity, oh no, it's simply because every time you use a weapon like that it's quite literally identical RP, the only difference is in who or what you're shooting.

 

 

Use is in the eye of the beholder. It helps foster a new kind of RP and promotes future scientific development on the server, rather than the current system we have of all innovation coming from magic / enchanting / alchemy lore posts rather than people like engineers and smiths in RP.

 

Onto the point of them being unfeasible or excessive, the same arguement applies the three to four varieties of holy magic and the whole "dragons" and "dragaar/drakaar" shenanigans that are present on the server. It's never stopped an endeavor in the past  and there is no need to dismiss what could contribute to other peoples experiences..

 

All RP combat can generally boiled down into the same six or so emotes. 

 

2 hours ago, Tarian said:

 

Cannons are extremely strong. Consider that a typical trebuchet could fire a large stone ball somewhere in the ballpark of 300 yards with pretty bad accuracy, then consider that a cannon could fire a slightly smaller but metal ball anywhere from 400 to 3000 yards with relatively phenomenal accuracy for the time. This is extremely generalized statistics but it gives you an idea of why castles simply ceased to exist outside of Asia after the 15th century.

 

What? Forts and castles (castles as we know them were really ******* rare regardless) were still relevant well past the spread of the cannon. People greatly overestimate how horrifically long it took to besiege a castle, especially how long it takes for siege engines to destroy a wall when sieges varied from 3-4 months (think this is the conservative average. most of the papers I've read shoot for that area) to literal years. 

[ARCHITECUS 4788]

1 hour ago, koko haram said:

 

I don't think complexity is a reasonable basis to refute the existence of firearms, and we must also look at the fact that what is proposed doesn't need to be something from "reality" as it were. With some thought as to streamlining how to properly streamline and balance the issue at hand we probably wouldn't have too much of an issue with that facet.

 

Streamlining (something about firearms? I have no clue what you are talking about) doesn't make any sense, and balancing restricts their usage to narrow avenues of RP, which is no fun for players with imagination.

 

1 hour ago, koko haram said:

If the benefit is allowing people to have a different type of RP, I don't see the harm.

 

Firearms do add a different type of RP, but it is a lone tasty sprinkle atop a cake emitting dangerous amounts of beta particles.

 

1 hour ago, koko haram said:

As for the argument of it being too "powerful", there is a reason that firearms weren't instantly prevalent. Platemail was effectively bulletproof, and (reportedly, not going to bother citing scholarly articles when I can eat doritos instead) even conventional breastplates fared well against matchlock firearms. 

 

Is plate your reason for firearms not instantly replacing other missile weapons? Check your so called scholarly articles next time, you glutton, and you'll find better ones. The effectiveness of plate depends on a variety of factors, including the force imparted by the firearm, weight of bullet, and qualities of the receiving steel.

 

1 hour ago, koko haram said:

I fail to grasp what you mean by "complexity" (be it the actual makeup of the weapon and understanding it, or the ability to accurately portray its effects) but in the ideas current iteration it doesn't even speak about any form of regulations (and I'm sure there likely would be, tbh) that could be imposed. If normies can't handle it, I'm sure there is a 

 

The complexity of firearms, referring to arquebuses, which I assume is the type of firearm being proposed, is, indeed, too much for the casual roleplayer to run with. A huge amount of players barely emote normal bows right, so what will make the multiple delicate steps required of a firearm any more accessible?

 

1 hour ago, koko haram said:

Use is in the eye of the beholder. It helps foster a new kind of RP and promotes future scientific development on the server, rather than the current system we have of all innovation coming from magic / enchanting / alchemy lore posts rather than people like engineers and smiths in RP.

 

What is this new kind of RP? Threatening people with firearms, hitting people with firearms, and shooting people with firearms? A precious few people ever RP taking care of their equipment, so we can count that one out.

 

Where will this scientific development end, I ask? Personally, I prefer mages and alchemists coming up with interesting developments rather than self-titled engineers pasting something from Wikipedia and calling it innovation.

 

1 hour ago, koko haram said:

Onto the point of them being unfeasible or excessive, the same arguement applies the three to four varieties of holy magic and the whole "dragons" and "dragaar/drakaar" shenanigans that are present on the server. It's never stopped an endeavor in the past  and there is no need to dismiss what could contribute to other peoples experiences..

 

Except dragon beings and magic from Aenguls do not have the potential of becoming ubiquitously used due to their RP composition alone!

 

1 hour ago, koko haram said:

All RP combat can generally boiled down into the same six or so emotes. 

 

Oh, yeah? For you, perhaps. Creativity will set you free, should you have the mind for it. :)

 

1 hour ago, koko haram said:

What? Forts and castles (castles as we know them were really ******* rare regardless) were still relevant well past the spread of the cannon.

 

They aren't as rare as you seem to imply, but they were relevant past the spread and development of cannons, yes. Fortifications underwent changes to adapt to such a weapon, and were still built in a style relevant as time went on, contrary to Tarian's statement.

 

1 hour ago, koko haram said:

People greatly overestimate how horrifically long it took to besiege a castle, especially how long it takes for siege engines to destroy a wall when sieges varied from 3-4 months (think this is the conservative average. most of the papers I've read shoot for that area) to literal years. 

 

You're right on the numbers there. Do keep in mind that with the introduction of cannons, the siege question changed from IF the enemies would surrender, to WHEN the enemies would surrender. That's just a nice adage paraphrased; I like it a lot.

[Ambduscias 1028]

13 hours ago, Alterazgohg said:

 

 

hello 911? i just witnessed a murder

[bungo 3965]

3 hours ago, Alterazgohg said:

 

Streamlining (something about firearms? I have no clue what you are talking about) doesn't make any sense, and balancing restricts their usage to narrow avenues of RP, which is no fun for players with imagination.

 

 

Firearms do add a different type of RP, but it is a lone tasty sprinkle atop a cake emitting dangerous amounts of beta particles.

 

 

Is plate your reason for firearms not instantly replacing other missile weapons? Check your so called scholarly articles next time, you glutton, and you'll find better ones. The effectiveness of plate depends on a variety of factors, including the force imparted by the firearm, weight of bullet, and qualities of the receiving steel.

 

 

The complexity of firearms, referring to arquebuses, which I assume is the type of firearm being proposed, is, indeed, too much for the casual roleplayer to run with. A huge amount of players barely emote normal bows right, so what will make the multiple delicate steps required of a firearm any more accessible?

 

 

What is this new kind of RP? Threatening people with firearms, hitting people with firearms, and shooting people with firearms? A precious few people ever RP taking care of their equipment, so we can count that one out.

 

Where will this scientific development end, I ask? Personally, I prefer mages and alchemists coming up with interesting developments rather than self-titled engineers pasting something from Wikipedia and calling it innovation.

 

 

Except dragon beings and magic from Aenguls do not have the potential of becoming ubiquitously used due to their RP composition alone!

 

 

Oh, yeah? For you, perhaps. Creativity will set you free, should you have the mind for it. :)

 

 

They aren't as rare as you seem to imply, but they were relevant past the spread and development of cannons, yes. Fortifications underwent changes to adapt to such a weapon, and were still built in a style relevant as time went on, contrary to Tarian's statement.

 

 

You're right on the numbers there. Do keep in mind that with the introduction of cannons, the siege question changed from IF the enemies would surrender, to WHEN the enemies would surrender. That's just a nice adage paraphrased; I like it a lot.

nice blog post

[Lotoke 25]

I don't know, it just doesn't fit for me, when I imagine LOTC, I never think of guns.

[Ethan the epic 115]

Nah I think I'll stick with the more medieval theme even though in this century guns would've been a big thing. But I'd prefer to stick with the Lotr kinda thing where we don't have modern weapons in years like 3434.

[J5_ 27]

No thanks

[Anderssn 1115]

Right off jumping into getting flintlock firearms sounds bad. Obvisouly, because everything else is still far behind. Start with Chinese handcannon like weaponry, some of us actually roleplayed the magic staffs in Anthos-Fringe as something like the Chinese handcannons and I bet the LT at the time hated those. It needs to be a slow and more natural process. An idea coming from the magic cannons that the dwarves made for example. Maybe blackpowder cannons at some point.

 

Not flintlock guns right away, the only thing Lotc has developed with gunpowder is explosives, tinker stuff. Start with chinese style handcannons, and I think it would be great. (i'm not saying we need an easterner to make these, just as the irl reference)

 

Spoiler

 

 

[LuneAria 169]

I can see it already. Me walking into Jburg, and the soldiers immediately surrounding me with their flintlocks. "Halt, infidel!" The captain cries "We saw you in Dreadlands!" Even though I had never been to Dreadlands on this persona before. I look around, to see if there's any possible way of escaping. "Move and I shoot!" The captain says. Welp. Guess we're f***ed.

[Sky 0]

On 9/21/2016 at 5:57 PM, koko haram said:

snip