Why don’t most fantasy settings have guns?

Depends on what Medieval era it's trying to copy. Handheld guns didn't see their way into Europe until the mid to late 14th century (cannons came about the early 13th century for Europeans).

Attached: ancient guns.jpg (1600x1200, 638K)

What, this again?

>Because going against a dragon or against a knight, wielding a gun, is not heroic.

How so? Would it be any different if you did it with a bow? Is it cowardly if you do it with a long spear? Surely you're distancing self with a spear! Don't be so daft, the knight is still engaging a fantastical creature that easily could char him to a crisp. Closing the gap with a gun doesn't make any less heroic, it just makes him more wise.

Stop spamming Veeky Forums

Have you considered that heroic fantasy just kinda sucks?

Excuse me but leave how would kirby fare in most fantasy settings with or without guns's can be gay in your setting or no?

What, this again?

>A thread died for this.
I'm so tired of fetish posters and they inane questions to post they retarded fapbait, waifu posters, stat me and this kind of Op, killing smaller threads of people asking about other sistems or how to make they setting better or whatever.
The majority repeat an incestuous patern of re used images since the time the quests where here (than killed another good bunch of good threads), specially fetish posters, they renact the same thread again and again, without any spark of creativity, trying to what, exactly? To Fap they could go to /aco/, /d/ or where they belong, /trash/. I seen good threads about folklore, interesting parts of the world die unbumped, too many threads derailed be fetishposters than had interesting premises and ended in a unglorious death in piss and shit.
Why we do allow this? We we do bump that shit. Is there a thing I can do to stop the board I love to end like creepy cousing of nu-/b/?

>Why we do allow this? We we do bump that shit.

Who is bumping? You know what word to write what field. Just reply it into oblivion. Without active mods it's the best we can do.

So are you two drunk, botnets, or ESL?

Stat it Veeky Forums.

Because of you. You personally. Every time a GM thinks about putting guns into his setting he remembers you OP, and how much of a faggot you are, and decides not to use them.

Attached: Hater.gif (233x137, 138K)

What, this again?

My dieselpunk setting has sentient transgender guns

What, this again?

That sounds terrible and we should force the people that keep making these threads to play in such a setting.

Stop bollocking about OP, I told you last time.

archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/58556038/
archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/58530284/
archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/58510948/
archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/58427545/
archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/58337586/
archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/58268659/
archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/58267492/
archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/58574285/
archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/58637466/

Report the faggot.

Attached: bollocking about.jpg (259x194, 10K)

What, this again?

>Every time a GM thinks about putting guns into his setting he remembers you OP
This is rapidly becoming unironically true, and I'm convinced OP really wants to remove guns from all fantasy settings and this is a false-flag campaign.

What, this again?

Literally this

I like katanas and guns and I put both of them in my settings.

What now?

What, this again?

Warhammer Fantasy
Magic the Gathering (portal)
Pathfinder
Grim Dawn
Legend of the Five Rings
World of Warcraft
Darkest Dungeon

Here's a better question. How many fantasy settings can you name that DONT have guns?
Hard mode. Games that aren't Dnd, made by Bethesda, or Bioware

What about guns that shoot katanas?

>franku franku franku

What, this again?

Because guns are a great equalizer.

Unless you are running some pants on head retarded game where having a metal ball rip through your gut / head from a "lvl 1 gun" deals D3 dmg and a high lvl gun deals D20 that is.

Does not matter if a bullet is fired from a $15 hardware store made slam bang or a $3,000 rifle if it hits you in the head.

And in a fantasy setting the heros are generaly gods among men because they have the money to buy armor to make swords glance where a bullet would punch through. Or they can throw a fireball at you from 50 yards away. But some bandits set on offing the group need only to get in close and pop them in the back of the head while the party is getting drunk at a tavern.

Players starting shit up with the guards? well holy fuckballs 20 of them just turned half your party into swiss cheese instead of trying to circle around and take down the master swordsmen in close quarters combat.

also matchlocks are fucking sexy.

Attached: matchlock_zpseffc5cc6.jpg (977x678, 104K)

>it’s another retard on Veeky Forums that doesn’t understand history
Knights and guns co existed for several centuries, in fact the plate armor that you like to stuff into your shitty setting was actually developed during the renaissance period as a response to firearms. What led to the death of feudalism was ironically the thing that you likely include in your own works, the printing press which led to a higher literacy rate and centralized nation which eventually led to the concept of a nation-state. So kill yourself for being retarded and never talk about things that you have no idea about again

What, this again?

Sounds, like Sengoku Jidai!

>Hard to balance
>Not romantic
>Ignorant of history
Choose one or more

that is terrifying

Sorry user, I’ve never played FATAL.

Historically, guns destabilized the hereditary warrior class and ended their monopoly on violence.

Anyone can kill, as opposed to needing to train from a young age as a squire, which kept that power in a small group. It's not at all coincidental that firearm ownership correlated with the rise of liberal democracies as any peasant could fight and kill in a war and demand rights.

We associate violence with heroism, letting anyone kill reliably with a gun is definitely "antiheroic." And in a fantasy world where you don't just have knights but other groups with concentrated and monopolized violence like monks, it's still highly destabilizing to give a peasant a gun and let them kill just as easily as a wizard who spent 20 years casting fireballs in a tower.

>BUT MUH TEST OF STRENGTH MUH ROMANTISICSM!!!!!!!!!!!!
Time moves on, the orcs will be crushed by the might of innovation, the dragons will be driven to extinction as they're shot out of the sky. And mages will answer for their oppression of non-magic users by the might of gunpowder. Adapt or die.

Entirely dependent on all those things being weak in comparison, meaning you're overall just making a wank fantasy in favor of the guns rather than challenging a wank fantasy in favor of the magic..

This pasta's stale

See

The rise of firearms and gunpowder in general correlates with the rise of absolutism over fedualism

Some sort of Slaanesh solid projectile weapon with the Toxic quality

Becayse ah guns is no ah funs!

Khaxar!

Attached: sketch1521653166324.png (1080x1920, 541K)

Gear down there big shifter. We are talking about a fantasy setting here under the idea of a D&D or Pathfinder kind of game not what happened in real world history.

Attached: NoFunAllowed.jpg (488x516, 89K)

Yoos makedli sam as mi.

>orcs start using guns themselves
>dragons evolve with thicker scales and learn how to focus their breath for longer range
>mages cast spells to cause rain or become artillery where guns cant touch them
time doesnt move on just for humans, gunnigger. orcs, dragons, and mages adapt too.

But my setting does have guns, they're just a rarity.

>DnD
>implying
There's been guns in DnD since Gygax was still in charge

Black powder requires european contact with post-9th century China, for IRL that was 13th century.
Hand cannons were a simultaneous invention in 13th century china and europe.
Arquebuses weren't until 15th.

Most fictional settings are set prior.

When guns become popular, armor drops from use. Using steel, you have to go so thick it's almost too heavy to use in order to stop close range gunfire, even early specimens.

If your setting has Monk available as a class, then very rare use of hand-sized cannons is reasonable. But if you have triggered weapons, no one sane uses lances and fullplate.

>all these redditors nervously trying to justify no firearms as they screech about romanticism

Attached: FAE1D120-BCB2-4919-A698-845122593B4F.gif (325x244, 1.84M)

Attached: 1437433077424.jpg (300x162, 27K)

Mine doesn't because it's not a copy and paste of actual history but with magic, it takes a different route in the development technology, it may end up having something similar to a gun but it will jever be the same thing, about to call my setting a boring special snowflake? Go ahead, i don't care

>about to call my setting a boring special snowflake? Go ahead, i don't care

How can you stand with such a huge chip on one shoulder?

Why is this bizarre autism singularity still farming earnest (You)s?

Full plate? Perhaps not, but halfplate was used for a very long time afterwars, and both the lance (in some form or another) and the hauberk survived well into the 1800s. What I think is cool is how the brace of pistols became lances in a sense; the knight would carry a number of them then discharge a pistol once they rode by the enemy; the idea of a pistol-knight is amazing.

at least the katanaposters are comically stupid or shitposting; this is just boring

What I want is Monster Hunter style gunlances.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_lance

They existed, they should be in-game.

>In 1396 European knights took up fire lances as mounted weapons

Neat.

>Mid to late 14th century.

1326 is mid now?

READ A HISTORY BOOK WRITTEN AFTER 1900 ALREADY

What about gunkatanas?

Like in TBZ?

Have you considered that you're shit?

This. How people can't see these threads for what they are is beyond me.

Because Veeky Forums loves to put salt in the wound. Everyone here is a tsundere, they pretend to hate OP but actually love to have him as a punchbag.

Because Lord of the Rings doesn't have guns

Evolution doesn't work that way.

Attached: 936.jpg (625x626, 27K)

>Orcs pick up firearms before other races do
I'll be borrowing this

Attached: 1520624345466.png (651x652, 391K)

Pretty sure that's a career in Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 2nd edition

Same as the wargame, pistoliers and outriders

Attached: Empire_Pistoliers.png (519x782, 1.16M)

Please explain how an unarmored person being run through with a level 1 sword is totally fine but in serious danger when it's a level 15 sword.

>tfw my magic-user was always in trouble of dying within swords up until level 7

Attached: 1521131390387.png (454x445, 135K)

Unironically reported. It’s not funny anymore. I was with you the first few dozen threads, but it’s old

I think its because most of fantasy setting is set in early-to-mid medieval period setting.

But if you feel you wan't to add one, then go make one yourself.

>"By about 1420, complete suits of plate armour had been developed...In the 15th and 16th centuries plate armored soldiers were the nucleus of every army. Large bodies of men-at-arms numbering thousands or even more than ten thousand men (approximately 60% to 70% of French armies were men at arms and the percentage was also big in other countries) were fighting on foot wearing full plate next to archers and crossbowmen...Plate armour was virtually invulnerable to sword slashes. It also protected the wearer well against spear or pike thrusts and provided decent defense against blunt trauma."
>"The use of plate armour declined in the 17th century, but it remained common both among the nobility and for the cuirassiers throughout the European wars of religion. After 1650, plate armour was mostly reduced to the simple breastplate (cuirass) worn by cuirassiers. This was due to the development of the flintlock musket, which could penetrate armour at a considerable distance. For infantry, the breastplate gained renewed importance with the development of shrapnel in the late Napoleonic wars. The use of steel plates sewn into flak jackets dates to World War II, replaced by more modern materials such as fibre-reinforced plastic since the 1950s."

Coexist with guns? Yes but not good guns, and decidedly not made to counter, but instead was killed off by, guns.
And definitely not made during the Rennaisance.

Every day until you like it.

>1326 is mid now?
NAYRT, but do you have a source on that? Because that's earlier than the (admittedly vague) shit I've read would seem to indicate.

>We associate violence with heroism, letting anyone kill reliably with a gun is definitely "antiheroic."
Says the user who has read exactly zero American literature, genre literature, or anyfucking thing else American before that advent of Tumblr.

Lamarck, you crazy fucker, go and stay go.

user what year do you think the renaissance started?

I'd rather have katana than the "le shit iron folded ten gigtillion tiems!!!" tards who are every bit as bad as the worst 1990s weebs.

Came her to post this, and I'm not even a Yank. Literally hundreds of Westerns have a hero who shoots down tomahawk-armed Injun warriors with a revolver or rifle.

Bard killed Smaug with a bow. Don't really see it making any difference if it had been a gun.

Dang it. I always mess up the Xth-century to XX00s conversion.

Well, my other point still stands.

Gun wouldn't have had to hit the special weak spot.
Anyone could do it, more or less.

Yes but they still co existed so what’s your point?

>anyone can hit the bullseye on an angry flying dragon
Hahahaha.

>user what year do you think the renaissance started?
It starts towards the end of the High medieval period in the late 1200s.

point and shoot. in modern times a fraction of time is spent on weapon training and the rest on making the mamas boys we call men hard enough for war. in ancient times the full time was dedicated to training, because the weapons took more technique and the men were already hard.

this mad lad cut the tails off fifty rats and he's still around!

First more historically notable employment of hand-guns was actually around 1420's - use of Hussite Píšťala (which is what gave us the word "pistol" much later down the line). And that was still a fairly unique situation - the guns were not really intended to kill anyone as they were used to scare people and more importantly horses, and their employment was conditioned heavily by the reliance on war vagon in Hussite strategy, which both negated the advantages of chivalry, and made scaring horses such an efficient strategy, since the Hussites didn't need much of their own chivalry on the field.

Since gunpowder was around quite a few centuries before that, I have no doubt some anomalous and historically irrelevant appearances of handguns can be traced back towards 14th or 13th century, but it had nearly zero impact.