Guns

[Kuiper7986]

No one ever said that sci-fi can only be like star trek, neocron, star wars, etc...

Like fantasy we are just accustomed to those being scifi even though as long as it isn\'t real, its sci-fi.

[faldrok]

I, personally, wouldn\'t mind either way....

...If we had a vote, I would vote for \"no\". The guns(older style like you said)aren\'t a bad idea, but like Icefalcon said, it doesn\'t fit into the \"fantasy\" genre as we know it. You will probably have something to explain to me(I am waiting ) but we are all stereotypical of what a \"fantasy\" game is....

....When people hear about \"fantasy\" games, they think Swords, Axes, Bows, Magic, Staffs, etc....

....well, maybe except Kuiper and maybe someone else.

Reason people are saying \"no\" is because of the stereotypes of \"fantasy\" games. That is my reason.

(Although, it would be good to \"break the edge\" with the musket[old gun] idea. The Devs always said they wanted to be original...

...They took out the stereotype of Dragons in all fantasy games. Who knows? This might be the next step in making PS it\'s \"own\" game. It wouldn\'t fit under a genre; it would be PlaneShift. I like that. )

[Kuiper7986]

Can you really explain \"fantasy\" genre, I bet no one here can find a legit reliable non-third party web page, that defines the \"fantasy\" genre. I tried and no luck.

People want to Planeshift to be ORIGINAL.  But there are some people who are stereotypic to the \"fantasy\" genre. How is the game going to be original if the stuff in the game is going to have the \"traditional\" fantasy genre. You can\'t say you want something to be original yet the stuff you want has to follow some kind of \"genre.\" Being Original doesn\'t mean following what type of genre or whatever. It means NOT following a certain type of continuation of what\'s going on. It isn\'t original to say okay, we want magic, swords, crossbows, and axes. How many \" Medieval fantasy\" games have that already,? But how many \"medieval fantasy\" games also have musket guns in them? Not very many if any at all. Its good that the Devs don\'t want Dragons in the game. That\'s wonderful that\'s being original, but denying the very principle of originality by following a stereotype opinion of what people want, infringes the purpose of originality. Musket Guns.

If the Devs have any opinions on musket guns or any of this please don\'t hesitate to add comments.

[Kraxton]

We can\'t box in creativity and expect it to remain vivacious and elastic. If we stamp PlaneShift with the label of \"Fantasy\" and say, \"There. You are a fantasy game, so grow up and act like a fantasy game!\" then we are stifling the creative potential of the game. I am wholeheartedly with Kuiper on this one. I think it would be a refreshing change to play a fantasy MMORPG with musket guns in it, and I don\'t feel it would hurt the game at all.

Using guns to cause long-range damage isn\'t any more of a \"first-person shooter\" experience than shooting them with bows, crossbows, or combat magic. Damage is damage, and since musket guns did exist in medieval times on Earth, we should be open-minded and original enough to break the mold and make a fantasy game which has them in it.

[Cirque]

Originally posted by Kuiper7986
Fantasy: \"The creative imagination; unrestrained fancy.\" So by limiting weapons you are limiting the very definition of fantasy.

There\'s no code or rule that says a \"fantasy\" game can only have a bow, crossbow, or any weapon of that sort in a fantasy game.

No I\'ve never read a fantasy book with a gun in it, but there\'s no reason why it shouldn\'t. There\'s no doctrine that states that if its fantasy then it can\'t have a gun.

OK this ought to decompose your argument to some extent. Bla Bla Bla \"everything you said about fantasy and how guns relate\".

Yes I agree to a certain degree, yet why must a gun conform with a predetermined definition of what a gun is perceived to be? By being set in concrete about guns your contridicting your whole argument.

As this game is fantasy orientated then the game can and should be something totally outrageous and new. We are only limited by our imagination.

A single shot muzzle loaded musket is not in anyway associated with fantasy. Its a solid object that exists in real life.

Feel free to reply to any component of my brief argument so I can further explain my point of view.

*EDIT* Im still questioning whether black powder fire arms existed in medievil times. Ill have to do some research.

[Wormtail_]

See Firearms area from this website - http://www.nps.gov/colo/Jthanout/HisArmur.html

The fantasy strategy game Age of Wonders had gunpowder in it. The Dwarves had cannons, which were deadly, but more expensive than the catapults the other races had. Humans had Musketeers, but they were easily slain yet could easily kill. The fact that some races had gunpowder while others did not was not overbalancing for the former. See http://aow.heavengames.com for details on AoW.

In the WoT series, the Illuminators used gunpowder in their fireworks, and gunpowder was a closely kept secret anyway, so nevermind. Although one fellow did use it to blast a hole in a wall...

[Yalzin]

The argument that the fantasy genre is not pre-defined is not a very good one. Yes the fantasy genre can be modified and that is a good thing to make the games diverse and original, but if you start adding any old thing to the game it starts moving away from the fantasy genre and into something different. I know it\'s not written that \"you cannot have a gun in a fantsay game\" but neither is it written \"you cannot have a green sky and pink fluffy elephants running around eating people\" everyone just knows that would make the game have less appeal.

And yes there is a difference between having a musket and a cannon - cannon\'s are large and clumsy weapons, you can\'t easily target someone and know they will drop dead with your first shot. And you can\'t just walk up behind someone and shoot them with a cannon, it\'s just impractical.

[Kraxton]

Actually, if you did a little research, you would realize that muzzle-loaded weapons didn\'t \"killl their target with the first shot\" on a very regular basis--actually, most shots missed, and the ones that did hit usually struck in the groin. One of the most common battle wounds during the US Civil War was a hit to the gonads. This was because of the tremendous kick of the rifles, which would cause the barrel to raise while firing, so to compensate, the soldiers were told to aim low so that they would hit the torso. Most soldiers overcompensated, and the result was frequent castration via mini ball.

[Xelex]

Instead of guns which I beleive, as do many others ruins the whole fantasy setting, why not slingshots? A forked peice of wood and rocks. It has more of a fantasy medeival setting then a gun.

[Icefalcon]

Originally posted by Xelex
 It has more of a fantasy medeival setting then a gun.

See someone agrees with me, guns are not of a fantasy medeval setting...

[faldrok]

Originally posted by Cirque
A single shot muzzle loaded musket is not in anyway associated with fantasy. Its a solid object that exists in real life.

Swords, Axes, Bows, etc. exist in real life. People just don\'t use them for killing(etc.) like they use guns.

I am still in the gray on this though. I would be happy either way. I can see how/why people believe they should be in, but I understand the other side too....

...So, I will just wait and see what time will bring us.

[Kuiper7986]

Icefalcon he\'s referring to a slingshot, not the gun. He said the Slingshot has more of a fantasy setting than a gun, but never says that the gun doesn\'t have any fantasy setting.

Cirque and I quote:
\"A single shot muzzle loaded musket is not in anyway associated with fantasy.\"
-Give me one reliable source that says that.


Cirque and I quote:
\"As this game is fantasy orientated then the game can and should be something totally outrageous and new. We are only limited by our imagination.\"
-Yes, that is so true! So having only swords, crossbows, axes, and spears,  is something totally outrageous and new?



To Yalzin: You can\'t compare musket guns and fluffy man-eating elephants, they aren\'t in the same category.\"
-BTW: Planeshift does kinda have a green sky. Not pure green but an off-tone color of green. As for the pink-elephants, hey its a new idea, nothing wrong with it, at least its more original than a green dragon.

Quoting Yalzin Again:
\"And yes there is a difference between having a musket and a cannon - cannon\'s are large and clumsy weapons, you can\'t easily target someone and know they will drop dead with your first shot. And you can\'t just walk up behind someone and shoot them with a cannon, it\'s just impractical.\"
-said \"just about\" the samething. I never said EXACTLY the samething.

[Cirque]

You can quote all you want but it has no bearing on what I believe. You seem threatened by what other people are putting forth.

My post may have seemed out of context to you so ill repost at a later date.

[Yalzin]

Originally posted by Kuiper7986
To Yalzin: You can\'t compare musket guns and fluffy man-eating elephants, they aren\'t in the same category.\"
-BTW: Planeshift does kinda have a green sky. Not pure green but an off-tone color of green. As for the pink-elephants, hey its a new idea, nothing wrong with it, at least its more original than a green dragon.

Quoting Yalzin Again:
\"And yes there is a difference between having a musket and a cannon - cannon\'s are large and clumsy weapons, you can\'t easily target someone and know they will drop dead with your first shot. And you can\'t just walk up behind someone and shoot them with a cannon, it\'s just impractical.\"
-said \"just about\" the samething. I never said EXACTLY the samething.

No my point is that just because there isn\'t a law prohibiting the use of guns in fantasy RPGs doesn\'t mean that they should eb used. The fact is there are no rules saying what you can and cannot have, but you must think about what is true to the nature of the game to make that decision. In my opinion guns would make people think that PS was focusing more on single-shot fights and long-distance combat which is more assosiated with the FPS genre.

I wouldn\'t have such an objection to a cannon because there is not the possibility of people ending fights quickly and easily with it, and it\'s main function is as artillery not in one-on-one fights.

And I don\'t want to know about soldiers being castrated, save that for the playground. I think you\'ll find that it is much easier to cause fatal damage to someone with a musket than it is with a sharp bit of steel, that is my objection.

[zinder]

Originally posted by Yalzin

I think you\'ll find that it is much easier to cause fatal damage to someone with a musket than it is with a sharp bit of steel, that is my objection.

Actually thats true for every ranged weapon, simply because you dont have to come nearly as close as with non-ranged weapon. So replace musket with bow, crossbow, sling, spear, etc and it is still the same. Its even easier with a crossbow or bow than with a musket.