Would advancement of gun technology in a fantasy setting led to extinction of bestial races incapable of producing them?

Sure, but what of the bestial races who *can* produce them?

When you say incapable, do you mean they lack the means to produce them or simply are unable to use them? If the other races can still use them, then I would assume an arms dealer would emerge to sell guns to these other races.

Well injuns and africans survived. Its a matter on how much it would be used on the beast races.

I doubt most monsters would have even survived something like the Roman Empire used to genocide any bothersome violent tribe without remorse.

Guns are pointless in a world of magic.
Obviously a modern army would beat a fantasy army.
But a fantasy world would never progress into gun technology.
Economics 101, no demand.

The point of guns is that they are cheap to made, any mercenary can use them. Bows requires complex and hard training that last many years. It's not a matter of precision, it's a matter of being strong enough to pierce armour with your arrows. Cannons, would appear long before guns (making obsolete any catapults etc), though.

By attaching a myth to the weapon

See the idea of the western gunslinger

Guns began with canons.
If a hundred mages can cause a rain storm of meteors. Nobody would have a reason to mass produce canons, or evolve them into guns.

Is there a reason why cannons MUST come before guns?
Seems like people are making the mistake that technological advancement is a video game with arbitrary prerequisites.

>Is there a reason why cannons MUST come before guns?
Because large and crude is easier to make than small and refined?

Really? You're asking this question?

its relatively easy to make a tube that launches iron balls out the other end

its harder to make it fit in someones hand while still being practical

its seems to be natural for things to start huge and get smaller, rather than the other way around

>injuns and africans survived

By being enslaved and colonized.

Now this is autism.

If anything fantasy setting would get guns faster since their alchemy is real and they would get exploding powders much faster.

There is literally nothing stopping mages from making magic guns and bullets. If anything break action guns could be the best magic delivery system you can imagine.

There are three main reasons why muskets completely replaced other ranged weapons.

1. Ammo is incredibly easy to make and store. People often forget it's hard and expensive to make good arrows and they are large.

2. They are very easy to maintain. Much easier than bows and crossbows.

3. They counter armor. And at short range they are almost a guaranteed fast kill.

There is also the fact that a bayonet turns them into short spears.

There's no point to armour or bows. Water magic would have fucked both.

Have the making of a gun or magi-gun be an artform honed for generations of a family line. Each house has their own style of gun as a result, each shooter responsible not only for upkeep but the smithing of the gun itself.
Guns as a result become almost a holy thing, meaning different things to each and every wielder while also potentially being wildly unique in style and function. This also means that guns themselves or at least the good ones aren't and will not for cultural reasons become ubiquitous in the world (pcs, or villains may with to change this, boom instant main campaign plot hook).
Powder of the black or alchemical variety could also differ house to house. Whenever I run powder fantasy I always make sure people know my fire powder isn't the mundane earth stuff. Pure powdered classical greek fire and earth, the orangish powder glows softly like a flickering candle in darkness, and becomes a dull grey if wet or expired through age.

They were slaving each other before and ended better than if they were left on their own, cause their slave labor went to something useful, minuscule as it was. At least before they fucked shit up, more so the Africans.

You can because the gun is the pussy bitch weapon. Anyone can pull a tiny lever and hold a stick.
Takes a heroic mother fucker to charge a demon with what is basically a sharpened metal rod.

Play in a wild west setting instead of a fantasy setting.

You know I'm right.

By doing pic related

I don't have nearly as much exposure to wild west settings as I do to fantasy.
What are the staples of the genre like how fantasy has Tolkien?

GURPS Old West, like many GURPS supplements, is a pretty good overview of the genre. Other than that, binge-watching John Wayne or Clint Eastwood westerns should give you a pretty good idea.

Mysterious lone gunmen with a code of morals helping out impoverished settler towns.

>whitewashing the gunslinger
That's racist you shitlord

>Every black guy is a violent gunslinger
That's even more racist, you double shitlord

Considerign he was describved as Clit Eastwood, I think you missed the color that's being washed.

I like Ildriss, but they ruined a huge set of important interactions by making him black. Worse, Roland is exactly the kind of man they want white men to be: he judges only by action, he sees the potential good and strengths and weaknesses in everyone, and he is colorblind and unable to see handicaps otherwise.

They literally turned the exemplar of everything they want white men to be like into a black guy for the sake of 'progressive film'.

>I like Ildriss, but they ruined a huge set of important interactions by making him black

What exactly

>se, Roland is exactly the kind of man they want white men to be: he judges only by action, he sees the potential good and strengths and weaknesses in everyone, and he is colorblind and unable to see handicaps otherwise.

...wat?

>Clit Eastwood

Hehehehehhehehehehheh

How the shit is this related to the thread /pol/-kun?

>See my brother has some THICC "The Dark Tower" book
>See it talked about, tired of generic fantasy, lets do this shit
>It's actually the graphic novel version by Marvel

Is it worth reading the graphic novel version first, or should I find the original novel and read that first?

Roland's interactions with Susannah/Detta are colored (ha ha) by the fact that she is a justifiably racist bitch. She refers to him as a 'honky mafah' on several occasions, rather than 'Unca Tom'. Even after she's healed, Detta doesn't trust him and susannah can become very snide if she thinks Roland is acting on preconceptions based on her color or handicap....which he never does. He respects her, and sees Detta for the dangerous, cunning woman she is, legless and black though she may be, and is very aware his underestimation of her nearly gets he and Eddie Dean (who is of Hispanic descent mind you) killed.

Roland doesn't see color, he doesn't care about handidcaps. He see the potential gunslinger in a strung out heroin addict and a legless woman, rather than presuming they're an addict who can't get better or a handicapped woman who can't walk. He doesn't care about color, race or creed; he deals in lead, and sees what is really there, not the surfaces that everyone - such as the film's producers - gets distracted by.

The graphic novels tell the story of a young Roland, and have little to do with the books otherwise. They're pretty well done though..

>guns are racist and genocidal

>injuns survived
Hahahahahaha

>Roland's interactions with Susannah/Detta are colored (ha ha) by the fact that she is a justifiably racist bitch. She refers to him as a 'honky mafah' on several occasions, rather than 'Unca Tom'.

So why can't she refer to him as Unca tom or be a white woman who calls him nigger in the movie

Black is inferior to white, so it would make sense for a white woman to think a black man would be underestimating her because of her skin color
They could make it about her gender though

>Wouldn't* make sense

>Black is inferior to white, so it would make sense for a white woman to think a black man would be underestimating her because of her skin color
... ???

Because white women in the 1960's weren't put in jail cells and abused by white racists assholes in the south, user. That's the point, the interactions are based on characterization built on their personal histories, and those histories are based in timelines. You want to rewrite the storuy from whole cloth, that's fine, but don't bother pretending that the characters can even be remotely similar to the ones in the book if you want to blackwash the main character and try and whitewash the others.

Because what they did is remove an example of the kind of white man they want every white man to be and completely render pointless a prime example of a strong, powerful handicapped black woman.

Way to miss their own fucking points.

What is the difference between guns and magic?

>Detta doesn't trust him and susannah can become very snide if she thinks Roland is acting on preconceptions based on her color or handicap....which he never does.
This interaction wouldn't make sense if she were white and he were black

Physics and lack thereof, respectively.

can you people go back to /pol/ for race discussions
But anyways i don't think that intoduction of gun will drive them to extinction.Make them less of a threat, most likely but not driving them to complete extincion

Normal people can use a gun

Guns are supposedly easier to use and have a more limited use.

Most "magical" settings don't actually do this. Magic is common, widespread, and basically technology by any other name.

>race relation shit
>stephen king

They would just steal/trade for the guns

Most setting with widespread magic also don't make any sense.

Note that it took a long time for the bayonet to be invented, a couple of centuries to be precise. Until then, it was all pike & shot.

Since when are they not?

Not necessarily. They would likely run the risk of getting marginalized, but remember that just because you can't produce them doesn't mean you can't buy them. So then you just end up with natives that had enough wealth to outfit themselves with firearms rising to prominence while other, poorer tribes are pushed to the fringes.

Also, fantasy. An eight foot tall orc using a longbow that hurls armor-piercing javelins is still relevant as hell, even if firearms become prevalent.

I run a Fantasy Western, and while having rifles and shotguns sure is useful, when you're dealing with magic and fantasy races, it's by no means some sort of silver bullet for colonization.

Who's to say they aren't? The Western Gunslinger, Richard Sharpe. Hell, I'd place Sharpe's Regiment right up there with the Knights of the Round Table as far as heroic bands go.

>Muskets counter armor
Please, stop this stale meme. Crossbows are better at punching through armor than early firearms.

You do realize that by the time things start being called muskets they're no longer "early firearms" right? We're talking centuries here.

>Considerign he was describved as Clit Eastwood, I think you missed the color that's being washed.

Spoilers for newfags who won't get this:

>First time around (that we get to see): The Gunslinger (1st edition). Roland lost the Horn of Deschain fleeing the battle that broke Mid-World. Astrological signs are mentioned. The order of Gunslingers is approximately 600 years old. Roland is described as looking "half Cherokee, half Amish".
>Second/third time around: The Drawing of the Three-The Wastelands/The Gunslinger (2003 edition). No astrological signs, now it's the totems of the Beams. Roland is described as looking sort of like Clint Eastwood. Later on, Roland is described as looking "exactly like Stephen King".
>Fourth time around: Events at the end of The Dark Tower (book VII). Roland now has the Horn of Deschain as he never dropped it during the battle. Oy is now a dog instead of a bumbler.
>?????? time around: the movie. Roland is now a black guy. The order of Gunslingers is "thousands of generations" old. Jake and Odetta are not drawn into Mid-World.
>?????? time around minus a few decades: the TV series.

tl;dr if you're really upset then pic related but every time the cycle repeats some things are different than the last time around.

And you do realize that plate armor as DnD knows it only rose to prominence in the era of pike and shot where muskets were commonplace? Specifically because of the protection it gave against muskets and other weapons.

We ain't talking bout d&d frendo. Hell if anything its one of the worst handlings of firearms in the rules various editions have for them (pushed back into a corner somewhere where few people will see them of course).

And wrong again buddy. Harquebus were commonplace. The specialized heavy ARMOUR PIERCING variety of which became known as the musket in reference the special troops which wielded them.

Oh, so I'm talking to a retard. Got it. Keep living in ignorance.

This is how you make guns heroic:

youtu.be/CTJlmlZWWHA?t=4m19s

Should I follow your lead then?

I always find it sort of weird that you do get to see the Gunslinger turned into a heroic figure, yet the crossbow fulfilled largely the same role -- easy to use, great against armor, even banned by the Pope for fucking up the balance of power between landed elite and commoners -- yet you rarely ever see the crossbow as the same sort of mythic weapon like the revolver or rifle. I suppose the lack of something akin to the Western helped with that, but I still find it amusing the the closest thing to the Gunslinger for the crossbow -- the Genoese crossbowmen -- are basically just remembered as hired thugs and mooks to get mowed down by English bowmen at Crecy thanks to weather conditions.

Victorian big game hunters venturing into the wild to destroy monsters.

Do you know the concept of the Knight-Errant?Yes? Then you know the concept of the gunslinger of Westerns and the basic idea of a western, to the fucking tee.

Muskets can penetrate armour. You are thinking of Arquebuses. They co-existed more or less for a long time. As time when one, centuries, muskets improved and replaced arquebuses completely while armour lost the arm's race in a century or two.

Meant fornot sure how I fucked up that reply.

The gunslinger gets multi-shot weapons. Standing around reloading doesn't make for very action-filled, heroic scenes.

>even banned by the Pope for fucking up the balance of power between landed elite and commoners

Well, he did ban the use of crossbows against Christians, that much is true. He also banned the use of slings and bows. In fact the crossbow isn't really mentioned specifically, while the sling and bow is, it seems to have been included on assumption mostly.

That'd it'd be because of any threat to the power structures of the time is by this obvious myth and bullshit, since these power structures emerged in a setting where we already have slings and bows, so if it was threatened by such it'd never come into being to begin with.

Instead it seems people shot at each other as a game, betting on who could hit who, and this is what the church objected to.

Canon 29: sourcebooks.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran2.asp

If they can pull the trigger they'll get guns because some fucking merchant is gonna sell them guns.

From what I understood of the whole thing Idris Elba was chosen, not because he's black, but because he is a phenomenal actor, and I'm fairly certain Stephen King had nothing to do with the decision.

Every fucking point you're making though, is moot, because this shit is supposedly set AFTER the events of the novels as they occurred in an alternate multiverse to the books. So, this version of Roland is black and the one you know and love is still there exactly the same, in the Novel multiiverse.

Well...

In the period of co-existance of musket and arquebus the former was a much larger weapon. IIRC generally served by a crew of two even.

But by the time the musket took over it had already shrunk somewhat, and it then rapidly shrank even more, until it became a weapon similar to the arquebus. So the majority of muskets are quite akin to the arquebus, and modern testing (Hall, Weapons and Warfare in Renaissance Europe) shows that the difference between them in terminal ballistics is little to none, completely overshadowed by the differences from one specific gun to another.

>They literally turned the exemplar of everything they want white men to be...
(((They))) want white men to be dead and forgotten as even history is rewritten to replace them with "minorities".

>Wick
>heroic
The man is just a solo/street samurai/gunzerker with ptsd

Different stories. The novels tell the story of Roland as a grown man, with the exception of the fourth. I would definitely recommend the novels to you though.

That's what they want everyone to be, they just run on the assumption white men are innately evil and incapable of that ideal

It is curious how early firearms were more precise than Napoleonic ones (barring jaërs and riflemen). This is mostly because in an effort to speed up the reloading, they sacrificed precision by making the ballet significantly smaller than the barrel. It's a quantity > quality thing.

John Wick is a villain through and through, a sympathetic and certainly principled villain but he is a villain or, at best, an anti-villain or a very close to the edge anti-hero.

I think he was given temporary hero status thanks to the murder of his dog and destruction of his house and now the revocation of his "assassins license" will further extend it, but if, and when, he wins he'll be a straight-up villain again.

Does anybody have any plausible sounding firearm concepts for fantasy that deviate from historical firearms?

Remember, no refunds!

It hasnt in real life.

Magic bullets!

...

I've been trying to figure out a way to have specialized wands fill the role without it being too similar to either

There's also caster guns from outlaw star. Still pretty gunnish, but cool nonetheless

Note that many natives adopted muskets right away. It was not until the machinegun that you could slaughter thousands of natives with or without guns.

Not in D&D.
If you really went Fantasy guns, man carried small artillery would suddenly be a thing.
So would variants of 1000x cape Derringers.

>rifle barrel magic staves
>rather than bullets (or mana crystals) fresh blood or an ambient magic field is needed
>the trigger isn't a pull of the finger but a ritual tic or a mental command in a specific mindspace
>instead of firing a bullet or fireball you shoot an intimidation or trip-and-drop-all-your-shit spell

gunpowder can be exploded with the use of magical talents. while this does not do much to effect the use of small arms, due to the relatively low amount of powder involved, it makes the use of canon untenable, as the destruction of a powder magazine can wipe out a surrounding company or two

That's why airguns would be the gun of vaguely renaiisant fantasy land.
Any elf, dwarf or gnome worth a dime could manufacture it's components, bullets are easy to make, it's easy to maintain and can't be interfered with by a simple fireball or rain spell.

You do realise that because of muskets, there was basically little to no advantage in wearing armor at all, hence why most armies cut costs and sent their forces in wearing nothing but colored wool and cloth.

I was replying to the fucker. Don't butt in, mongoloid.

What's stopping wizards with water magic to ruin armour, crossbows, and bows too? What's stops wizards from shielding gunpowder?