Curse

BahamutKaiser · Nov 18, 2006, 06:06 AM // 06:06

A dragon deals precisely as much damage as anything else in the game. Comparing Glint and Kunnavang as examples is no different than comparing the lich or shiro as a standard for humans, obviously characters would use a standard which parrallels humans, and as a direct comparison, we fight dragons all the time in GW and they don't actually put up any more of a match than any other creature. The restriction behind dragons is that it isn't a common and easly produced power like a gun, it isn't something that would erase warrior and ranger from the battlefield, it isn't even human so it offers no advantage to the weak, nor does it equalize the battlefield. If you actually thought about the impact of dragons and the impact of guns you would have realized that, but your not thinking at all, your assuming.

Now when I say sequel to GW I didn't say next chapter, or even next 10 chapters. I said sequel, and more specifically I ment Sequel, the next generation of GW. It will not occupy the same timeline as this version, and it will likely be in the not too distant future. Any guns now means no feudal combat in the future, effectively removing the possibility of a sequel with any sort of realism altogether, a world with feudal combat and guns is nothing short of FF, and even they are unrealistic.

As for a realistic firing rate for a weapon which would rationally take way to long in normal combat, I already remedied that. The only way to have a rifle type weapon in GW which is even remotely as limited as it should be is to simply be a skill and not an actual weapon. In this way you use a skill which basicly functions exactly like a nuke spell, high damage on a single target with a high recast, like a real gun. Obviously this adds nothing new to the game, except that maybe you would have a nuke spell in signet form....

Now you can keep arguing the weaknesses of a gun all day long, no matter how your balance it with other classes, it will never remove the fact that guns provide the neccessary technology for nearly talentless people to brandish lethal force, effectively ending this period of warfare. It has nothing to do with class balance or comparison with other weapons, it has to do with realism, which simply doesn't allow for feudal combat and guns to coexsist.

And the Steam Cannon has been reinvented, telling me that some TV show couldn't reproduce it on a whim doesn't mean anything to me, it has been reproduced by scientist, and doesn't just work, but has been tested with great success. History is riddled with marvels and discoveries which were lost, modern technology still doesn't explain the pyrimids, and doesn't account for a great number of inventions lost to time. The scientific equivelent of "Jackass" doesn't disprove Archemidies Steam Cannon, nor does a dated show recognize the revolution of current events. It tolk centuries for society and human kind as a whole to develope the amount of mathimatical knowledge Archemidies did by himself, pretending to understand his mysteries is ignorant, very. Obviously it was not built with modern day technology, an unparralleled feat of genious designed the steam cannon, and no amount of modern tools compare.

If guns were being developed in a GW environment, no single class would be using a hand gun, a mini cannon would be neccessary to even deal damage, and shrapnel AoE skills are far more realistic than hand held combustion weapons. If hand guns exsisted, everyone would have one, that is the reality of guns, just as 16th-18th century pirates would use pistols and sabers, everyone would have a gun to compliment whatever else they can do, because the ultimate result is widespread use, not a new weapon for one class.

Jesse · Nov 18, 2006, 06:32 AM // 06:32

Awsome depth and thourough planning. This is a very feasable concept and is excellently done. A + is my grade to this and i would like to see something like this in Chapter 4 because many of your elements are reachable. Good job.

Crom The Pale · Nov 18, 2006, 06:43 AM // 06:43

While I truly hope guns are not added to GW I can see a way that would not unbalance the game.

The guns would be tied to the profs primary skill but instead of being dmg related it would be accuracy. So if a war picked up the gun he woud miss 90% of the time. The dmg could be fixed to another attribute or standard with every hit. (precident the wurms you control always deal the same dmg if you have a spear equiped when you enter one) The reload time would limit the overall damage to something reasonable and skills would offcourse need to be ballanced. One way would be to have skills that called a body part to be targeted and cause a condition if you hit. ie leg shot = criple , head shot=dazed.
Another balance would be armor. Low armor for mobility and to allow carring of a heavy weapon He's not likely built like a war but more like a mesmer.

In the end however your really just going to end up with a ranger that uses a diffent graphical weapon with very similar uses and builds.

Good try but it just wont fly...

natuxatu · Nov 18, 2006, 06:57 AM // 06:57

I like that idea but guns I still frown on.. unless it was a magical type gun that shoots out fire/ice dmg or whatever that will be effected by blindness ect.. like rangers and paragons but like ranger and paragons have the poison and stuff these guns could shoot out ice and other funky spells *shrug* maybe more like an alchemist thingy.

BahamutKaiser · Nov 18, 2006, 07:18 AM // 07:18

As I have said, balance is a standard, not an issue. It will be balanced if it is in the game, if they wanted, they could make guns less powerful than throwing a rock, it is the reality of firepower that doesn't fit. In the end, it offers nothing to the game, it will either be another ranged weapon just like bow and spear, or it will be a nuke skill just like elementist attacks, it is just a poor choice for another ranged opportunity.

System_Crush · Nov 18, 2006, 10:40 AM // 10:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by BahamutKaiser

As I have said, balance is a standard, not an issue. It will be balanced if it is in the game, if they wanted, they could make guns less powerful than throwing a rock, it is the reality of firepower that doesn't fit. In the end, it offers nothing to the game, it will either be another ranged weapon just like bow and spear, or it will be a nuke skill just like elementist attacks, it is just a poor choice for another ranged opportunity.

I should let this wait till I finish my Bucaneer CC, but I'm getting rather tired of people that don't know guns/basic physics. With the exeption of draxynnic u'r a cool guy

A projectile deals damge relative to its force, its force is a direct effect off its acceleration and mass(weight), a arrow acceleratates off the bow there for the acceleration it recieves from the bow is the energy it will carry until it hits it's target and comes to a full stop(dumping its energy it used to have for movement into damaging the target)
(I'll handle falling later)(and am neglecting friction by air as in GW there is no spoon

)

Arrows lets say they way 0.45kg are fired from a bow
(technically compound bows fire at higher speed than longbows and longbow more than short bows but Anet has chosen to ignore this)
at a speed deterined by the maximum tention a archer can apply to a bow string, and whether he actually goes all out or not(not going all out is faster shooting, also less tiering and negalectably more acurate)

Shooting a arrow upwards makes it fall, the longer it falls the faster it goes thusly the more damage it does. It recieves a acceleration 9.5m/s for each second it falls.

From that I would guess an arrow to be somewhere between 40m/s off a bow and 60m/s after falling for 6 seconds.
To not make it more complicated than it already is we will assume it takes exactly 1 second for an arrow to transfer its energy into impact energy(acceleration goes from X to 0 meaning speed = acceleration)
Now taking the averige speed F= Mass*Acceleration = 0.45(kg)*50(m/s/s) = 22.5 newton of energy transferred into damage.

I'm sure there are flechers out there that know the exact speed at wich an arrow moves, and i probably got it very wrong if so plz flame me, as long as you menion the correct equalation.

now a bow might just level with a musket so I'll first do a crossbow too.
Bolt 0.82kg (metal crosbow arrow heavyer to pierce armour, it pierces armour because it has more energy, which at the time I'm sure they sorta knew)
crossbow fireing speed 60-70 m/s the arrow flie faster so you can shoot them higher thusly they gather more speed while falling 85m/s for falling 9 seconds.
the average speed is then 72.5 F = m*a = 0.82*77.5 = 59.45 newton transferred into damage.

A musket is the most logical gun to place in guild wars, it was like the first good gun, it fired 1 small lead ball, with the most terrible accuracy of a commonly used war weapon ever.
Muskets don't shoot straight they fire in a curve ball to whatever side of the barral the bullet hits last.
(like ranger's arrow arch high, medium and low the sideway movement of a musket could have 3 degrees inaccuracy, but not returning like an arrow just going offcourse making the miss chance more the farter away the target is)
It was only untill percision manufactering was invented in 1860-1890(not sure doesn't really matter) pointed bullets could be made, which are longer thus heavyer, because before that they could not make a bullet precise enough to fit the barral so that groeves could make it spinn(cylinders spinn forward over and boomerang(downwards into the ground) if you don't make them spinn around their circualr edge)

Now: small lead ball 0.15kg.
Todays guns fire at slightly above the speed of sound(340 m/s) for a hand gun, and plenty of above for a high velocity rifle.
Muskets had black powder(messy stainy and less efficient than current gun powder), crude barrels and wasted energy due to not perfectly fitting bullets. so I gamble at 300 m/s
F = m*a = 0.15*300 = 45 newton into damage, only 75% of the crossbow and taken that the crossbow mas much more acurate, it is reasonable if you start to wonder why a musket was ussed more than a crossbow.

The reason is friction, the speed paired with the size of a bolt made it 50-60% likely to pierce a platemail and 1-5% to pierce a shield(of metal wood would have been higher), the bullet was smaller and therfor encountered less resistance from armour(no getting stuck half way because of scraping along the sides) it was 90% likely to pierce a platemail and 50-70% to pierce a shield.

Game wise all of that translates to!
Musket (2 handed)
Armour piercing 30%
5% chance to miss for every 5' of distance shot.
Damage: 15-35 (requires 9 Firearm mastery)
at a speed of 4.15 (54% slower than the slowest bow, 207.5% slower than the fastest)
and a near instant strike(instead of a flying projectile more of a straight line mesh with color moving along it)
Range 90

The damage should be 27-50 to be exactly 80% more damaging than a bow, but balance wise I think 0.0%-69.4% is quite enough.
I realise this may look over powered, but taken into acount the hammer which is 31.% slower than a sword but deals 26.6%-59% more damage and does not have a miss% I would say this is similar(instead if giving up offhand you give up even more speed)

now comes the flaming;
FFS, HOW DID YOU GET THE IDEA OF A UNCHANGING DAMAGE OUTPUT?!!!
That is reality wise impossible, and game wise totaly unrealistic.
First of all no shot is the same(chaos theory and all that) you will not only hit someone in the exact same way twice, but the element of chance would also affect the damage.
Also a warrior fireing a gun would do much less damage than a gun expert, they would flinsh when fireing, aim with a unsteady hand and probably also put in the wrong mixture and amount of gun powder.
They would be more likelt to miss yes, but fireing point blank(withing 40') even a big block o' lvl 8 drox armour could hit his target.

GW has set amount of chances of hit each body part taken form The Art of Tanking

12.5% chance of attacks hitting your head
12.5% chance of attacks hitting your feet
12.5% chance of attacks hitting your arms
25.0% chance of attacks hitting your legs
37.5% chance of attacks hitting your chest

this means game wise your steady damage would deal the same damage on a head shot as it would when shooting somone in his toe.
spells are guided mytically, this means they always hit the same way therefor always deal the same damage all the caster has to do is keep consentrated on his target, and hope there is nothing in the way.
Bullets are not guided by the gift of the gods, and there for can not story wise for GW strike magically guided.

Concludingly I am completely against mixing magic and technology, I agree with the acranum theory(magic warps/breaks the laws of physics while technology needs them to work correctly, introduced in the game Acranum by the now bankrupt Troika games)
I hate it when clearly technological devices are said to work with magic. IF ITS MAGICAL IT LOOKS MAGICAL! IF NOT YOU HAVE A LACK OF IMAGINATION.
and I think there should never be a class in GW or any other game, that is both magical and technologically inclined(at the same time).
You could make a class that has both but when using one the other is locked/strongly lowered in effectiveness for x seconds.

Shorter for the people who don't like/have time to read alot.
I can't say I like the class as I think you should never mix technology and magic, and alchemy is the magical counterpart of chemistry/herbeology(not a historic version of, they tried finding magical properties of substances, which they precieved to be brought forth from a mix of multiple elements and elements where though to have magical(ish) properties)

Baffeled is not good for gw, as blind doesn't do anything to your screen either. it should have the same effect on players as it does on npc's and a aditional effect to players meant only to annoy/hinder them is unlikely, unreasonable and not very ballanced.
It's fun though I'll give you that, my AO NT also does a AoE blind in a pvp area and then runs like hell, only to see teh kiting PvPers run into things, and get killed by the people chasing them

All you gun dissers should keep quiet about guns being to strong,

1 archer v.s. 1 musketeer = archer wins
20 archer v.s. 20 musketeer = about even
40 archer v.s. 40 musketeer = musketteers win

the first guns sucked compared to the bows at the time, they where only used because of the armour piercing and the psychological effect
(psychology should not be underestimated it has won more fights of any size then guns have)
EDIT: just read BahamutKaiser's piece on gun's allowing normal people to become effective at killing, they have more chance with a dagger, musketeers where trained 2 or 3 years longer than archers, because it takes a lot of practice and lots of repetition to use a weapon with soo much recharge time effectivaly.

BahamutKaiser · Nov 18, 2006, 06:40 PM // 18:40

That is exactly what I said, a single man with a gun in feudal combat would just get cut down. What actually happens to the reality of GW if you actually have guns though?, war just become numbers and technology. You may consider that 20 archers vs 20 musketeers is about even, but when you compare the quality and reproduction of an archer to a musketeer, the dilusion ends. 20 untrained men with bows vs 20 untrained men with guns, who wins? 500 proficient warriors vs 5000 farmers with guns, who wins? The product of guns is untalented lethality, it doesn't have to be accurate, it doesn't even have to be the most powerful, in reality, it takes fatality out of the hands of skilled combatants and puts in squarely in the hands of any fool who can load a gun. A gun does not have to be used effectively to be lethal, that is the point. A weapon with little to no impact used by a single character, and totaly damning to the reality of the game.

If you go into battle with 100 untrained swordsmen vs 15 trained ones, who wins?, 40 archers with accuracy vs 100 who can't pull a string back? Guns are equalizers, they replace skill and strength with technology, they always have been and always will be. We intentionally play a game that involves feudal combat because we like it, and guess what, feudal combat wasn't replaced because people suddenly stopped liking it, your suggesting the very tool of its destruction.

Now considering that GW involves Dragons and humans who can summon meteors out of the sky, and lightning bolts out of their hand, a gun really isn't impressive by itself, and doesn't provide a psychological factor. A gun shot from a prototype weapon doesn't have a fraction of the scare factor that a man who can snap lightning out of his hand does, guess what, thunder is still scarier than a gunshot, and when you know it is aimed at you, you are damn scared. Argue the technicallities all you want, it doesn't change the effect of guns on GW, it will suck, no matter how much you justify it, it will still suck, it would be unreal and it would be pathetic.

draxynnic · Nov 19, 2006, 05:57 AM // 05:57

Actually, firing in the arc doesn't increase kinetic energy. If you ignore air resistance, regardless of the angle you shoot at, it'll strike with the same energy that it had when it left the bow (assuming your target is at the same elevation you are) - the acceleration from gravity in the descending part of the arc is balanced by deceleration on the way up. The reason arrows are fired in an arc is that the arc grants a longer range - for frictionless projectile motion the optimal arc is 45 degrees, but in the atmosphere, it's closer to 30-35 degrees, and firing at a flatter arc if possible is preferable to reduce air resistance and wind effects.

On the socialogical effects - I think the gripping hand is that Pandora's box has already been opened - cannons have already been introduced into the game. If it is inevitable that early handguns will lead to later handguns that revolutionise the battlefield, it is equally inevitable that sooner or later someone will twig to the idea of making a portable cannon, leading to the handgun. In Europe, the gap between the first cannons and the first handguns was on the same order as the gap between the first handguns and the time where handguns started to take over.

Also, I really don't see the significance of a completely new game as a sequel as opposed to simply adding more chapters - they could just as easily have a full sequel be six months after the last chapter of the original as they could make the next chapter be ten years afterwards. Either way, if they continue at the current rate, or even at the rate set by the gap between Factions and Nightfall (3 years gametime for 6 months realtime) that gives about fifteen years realtime before it starts to be an issue.

BahamutKaiser · Nov 19, 2006, 09:19 PM // 21:19

Eventually technology will advance far enough to make an even better game which is still functional for what will be common systems in 3 or 4 years, and GW could easily continue if they keep improving. At that point it will be important for them to revive the game with new technologies and a sequel.

There were great deal of firearms between the invention of gunpowder and the refinement of it that are being excluded, and creating a time frame in a world of magic with real world advancements is obviously innaccurate, as the need for technological power is bypassed by the use of magical power, easily chancing that people would research something totaly differen't and not advance firearms at all. There have been hand held firearms as long as there have been cannons, perhaps longer, but they sucked. Equate that against the awsome magical powers available which can create catastrophies like the Jade Wind, the Searing, and the sinking of Orr, and the advancement of technological weapons takes a clear second stage, if a stage at all. Context changes everything.

Adding Firearms will be an issue immediately, the use of firearms starts replacing strength and skill right away.

Also note that all technology isn't progressive, to be true, technology has digressed innumberable times throughout history, if every human invention were preserved and compiled throughout history, we would be 2000+ years more advanced than we are today, and even in GW, powerful magics and history are lost and redeveloped, so assuming technology simply advances to the next level is also premature. Even on your timeline, functional rifles and handguns wouldn't be developed for a few hundred more years, the cannons siege turtles use are just gunpowder and a rock which only fires a few meters, about the same level of achievement the Chinese had, and there is a 300 year stretch between the chinese developement of explosives and experimental firearms, and the European achievement of the early hand held cannons which eventually evolved into flintlocks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Gunpowder was invented in China around the 9th century AD. Chinese first used gunpowder in warfare in 904, as incendiary projectiles called "flying fires." "Fire lances", gunpowder-propelled arrows, were used in China from at least 1132. In 1221, cast iron bombs thrown by hand, sling, and catapult are mentioned. Somewhere around 1249, the Chinese of the Song Dynasty began to load early gunpowder in the middle of thick bamboo as a projection firearm, firing clay pellets like a shotgun. At some point in the late fourteenth century (the earliest certain example is dated 1332) they replaced the bamboo with bronze. Additionally, the Chinese and Mongols took up the use of "true" gunpowder instead of the slower-burning older mixture - which made this early cannon - known as the Huochong - more reliable and powerful. During wartime, the Chinese used the early gunpowder weapons in defence against the Mongols, and the weapon was taken up by the Mongol conquerors later. Many of the earliest weapons seem to primarily have functioned as psychological weapons, a trait gunpowder arms would keep for a long time.

During the time of the Song dynasty 11th-13th century CE, portable firearms were introduced in the form of bronze tubes (based on the firelance designs) that fired rounds iron balls.

Around the late 1400s in Europe, smaller and portable hand-held cannons were developed, creating in effect the first smooth-boore personal firearm. As the centuries progessed, these hand-held cannons evolved into the flintlock rifle, then the breech loader and finally the automatic.

Notice that the first firearms where Propelled arrows and bombs thrown by hand or sling, just as I mentioned, and when the Europeans first obtianed firearms they first had hand held cannons, which eventually refined into smaller and faster firing weapons. Truth be told, using any gun short of a flintlock isn't an acceptable form of weapon for GW, as the weapons are not going to include extremely long refire rates and super high damage, leaving the choice between advanced firearms already coming close to automatic fire, or slinging bombs or skills which occasionally allow you to fire off a small cannon, as I suggested. A makeshift shotgun is closer to being built than a rifle in terms of advancements in technology.

As I said before, unneeded, unrealistic, unreasonable, and determental to the environment GW fosters. On an ending note, in GW, the mist connects all times and dimentions, and they can be explored by humans, Just like Lord Odran did (GW Manuscripts, page71). Lord Odran explored nearly every dimention, and left portals open which have been and are found even though they were well hidden. Just as we travel to the hall of heros, forces from the future can as well, with thier fully developed guns and war machines, unless they don't exsist at all. If guns are available at all, they are available already, meaning anyone who has already made guns, or explored the alternate dimentions could already have obtained such weapons of great advancement and usurped power just as soon as they could combine those two talents together, the only assurance that such a thing doesn't happen is if such technology never becomes available, and in a world of magic, they never need to.

System_Crush · Nov 19, 2006, 09:50 PM // 21:50

...(He's got me there)
So you can actually, corretly underbuild you statments, in stead of just being critical(it's not the sientific reference that did it, your talk about contexts was what truly shut me up)
Taken a look at it I realise you are right, guns would take a background place in cultures that have magic to the work others would use technology for.
taken that the backstory to GW mentions a period where magic was gone(when it was brought back al the guilds started fighting over it)
this period would have prompted the development of the explocive weapons, under sertain cultures, but the return of magic would have mages rising to power as they always do and trying to hinder the development as much as they can.(as I said magic and technology disrupt eachother)

Darn this means I will have to revise the bukaneer to use another ranged weapon...

draxynnic · Nov 20, 2006, 02:55 AM // 02:55

Hrrmn. I might have to hit the books and amend that wikipedia article - I'm pretty certain I've seen man-portable experimental firearms in the 1300s (although later rather than sooner). Late 1400s is when they first started to be adopted as viable alternatives to the bow and crossbow, although it wasn't until into the 1500s that they started taking over.

On the Mists: The Mists themselves may connect to everything, but that doesn't mean that all the portals are open in all times - they were closed until Lord Odran opened them, and they may be closed or otherwise made unusable (Tomb of Primeval Kings, anyone?) in the future. Or the spirits may consider more technological combat boring, or funnel any such combatants into a different arena, or the people from the future may not see the point of going into the Mists. There are possible explanations.

Which brings us to magic acting as an impedance to technology, which is a common excuse for halting progress in fantasy settings (those that even think of it at all rather than simply having technology stagnate at Middle Ages technology indefinitely). This commonly takes two forms:

1) The 'hard' limit. As with Arcanum, magic and technology are incompatible - magic interferes with the laws of physics so that technology doesn't work. It works, up to a point. I'd personally say that the breakdown should be subtle enough that it only blocks Industrial Revolution-level technology - less complex technology survives because the fluctuations are small enough not to matter.

The simplest firearms should still work - unless the magical field somehow stops application of flame to a flammable substance from leading to fire. In more extreme cases of impedance, more complicated forms with internal workings may be at risk - but if it's that extreme, you're also putting windmills and watermills at just as much, possibly greater, risk.

2) The 'soft' limit - because magic is available, people don't bother with technology. This is most effective as a limit when the only barrier to magic is intelligence - if anyone sufficiently intelligent can become a magic-user, there simple may not be enough brainpower left to come up with technology. If there are other barriers, than anyone who is intelligent but not magically gifted may start tinkering, unless this is suppressed by the magic-users - however, suppression doesn't stop people working on it in secret (it may even provide more impetus to 'even the odds'). Even if all the smart people are magicians, that doesn't stop them from having hobbies...

Magic can certainly slow things down - however, it doesn't stop it entirely (at least without the 'hard' limit). However, this hurts your argument as much as it helps it - since as well as slowing down when handguns first appear, it will also slow down the tipping point after which handguns become widespread. You contend that magic means that the development of guns can stop (or be suspended) at cannons and never reach the point of handguns - I countercontend that it can also suspend the process of handguns developing from the experimental stage to being the dominant force of warfare. After all, consider trying to sell handguns to a war leader that already has a contingent of elementalists on call... Ultimately, you can't have it both ways - if development is slowed, it could just as easily be slowed after the development of handguns as before.

3) This is a form that is rarely considered, but would probably be my justification for a lack of firearms. Forget about all the mystical "magic disrupts technology" stuff or the theoretical cultural ramifications of magic and consider the practical implications.

First, to employ a firearm is to accept as a result that you're going to have to carry an inflammable substance. On a non-magical battlefield, this is fairly unimportant, as the likelyhood of bing hit by fire is fairly small. But on a magical battlefield, where a fireball or a Searing Flames could come at any moment? Not a comforting thought.

Another consideration is the long reload times - and this could explain the lack of crossbows as well. Magic presents a lot of opportunities to mess with someone with a long reload time that weren't available in the Renaissance - any AOEDOT such as Rain of Fire, for instance (yes, you can get out of the way, but while you're doing so you're not reloading), or a Mesmer spamming Clumsiness may be able to hit your every shot while still having enough time to mess up someone else, and so on...

Essentially, it's these practical considerations that, in my mind, mark the biggest issue against early handguns in a fantasy setting. On socialogical explanations - well, I don't think you can simply freeze the clock. You can slow it down, but all you need is the odd one or two that play with this explosive powder (just what do Rangers use for the Ignite Arrows preparation, anyway?) every so often to eventually come up with something that is potentially usable - the 'carry multiple pistols and don't bother reloading in combat' trick, for instance, or even straight from no firearms on the battlefield to something like a bolt-action rifle or even something futuristic (it sounds silly, but we come back to that 'carrying potentially explosive ammunition when there are fireballs flying' thing). It's just that, since they aren't an important feature of the battlefield, there isn't the impetus behind their development that there was in the real world, so the development cycle could be orders of magnitude longer than in the real world.

That doesn't necassarily stop the odd lunatic for insisting on bringing their contraption out exploring, though... (You just might see "-20 AL against Fire" as one of the balancing factors for the firearm.)

BahamutKaiser · Nov 20, 2006, 04:26 AM // 04:26

As magic slows down the discovery of handguns, it would also slow down the developement, but there is a big difference between how long it takes to realize a technology, and the eventual finality of its reign. Yet the part about the mist is irrevocable. All of the universe connects to the mist, and in the mist, the greatest reach the Rift, the greatest of any time or dimention, thus guns end up in the Rift. And Lord Odran opened paths to nearly all dimentions, so any multitude of futurized dimentions should be available if nearly all of them were opened. And the path from the Tomb of the Unknown Kings wasn't moved "because the portal closed", that is a byproduct of placing all the PvP on Battle Isle, and reguardless, such doesn't presume that the multitude, if not scores of futuristic dimentions suddenly lose the path to the mists. Beyond that, with enough technology, they could well make a new path into the mists, assuming they lack the magic to do it.

GW just isn't the game for guns, a game with Feudal combat, Magic powers, and Firearms, has to function differently altogether. Like a good FF, the majority of Feudal style combatants would all have to be equally or somewhat well versed in magics which would provide protection vs projectile attacks. Personally, I don't even think FF does a good enough job providing a legitimate means of overcoming projectile weapons, IMO, Protect should block physical melee attacks, Shell should block magic damage, and a spell called Deflect should be available to overcome projectile threats. But there is a distinct limitation to how much a character is capable of in GW, and a full variety of abilities can't be obtained, nor does this game incorperate the general defense against mechanical weapons to combat the obstercal.

I've seen alot of people bring up a million gun facts to prove that they don't really have a significant advantage and they would be to primitive to outclass in general, but that isn't the way games work. How many fantasy games do you know of that have guns?, how many of them just have people shoting away like no tomarrow and people just let bullets roll of their shoulder. Combat is much different, not just for guns, but for all the weapons we use, one good arrow or sword blow and its over, combat isn't about how many hits you can survive, its about how well you avoid hits to survive, but with a gun, it kills if you get hit, even if you arn't killed, you don't have much fight left, and a general weapon which has a passive miss rate is hardly acceptable. The way I see it, if firearms are considered at all, the best use would be a set of skills which function like an elementist spell attribute, not an actual weapon. Mortars, bombs, Mines and perhaps a few hand held firearm weapons like a firelance. But honestly, who wants to use those things in a feudal game anyway? Truth is that it isn't even popular, it is just a force of habit, people habitually suggest gun oriented classes without even significant interest, of all the class ideas and additions this is perhaps the least desired idea (not including trash and sucky shit), and it keeps coming up. As I was saying, playing as a dragon is a better idea. More appealing, more "Awe" factor, more respect and honor (not a feature obtained by shotting guns), and more practical for a GW environment. Simple difficulty is people can wrap their mind around guns and not dragons, simple fact is that dragons belong in GW, and Guns don't.

If Anet adds guns to GW, you know what, life will go on, the game itself woln't really change. Only real impact is on the realism of the game, and for a game which features some pretty sound mechanics and realism, that is a significant hit. If this was a game where harp strums produced damage and you could catch bullets with your hands, it would tack on a lame badge which any outside person looking in would declare, "that's just fake". Personally, such ideas remind me of gameplay like FFXI where 6 people group around a small creature for 5 minutes at a time just trying to kill it for exp, besides the unbelievable grind factor, it is just lame gameplay.

I have often dreamed of making a game which included much of the feudal, magical, and modern warfare mechanics in it, which is thoughoughly fantasy, but also scifi, or rationally valid. There are a great multitude of functions which could be utilized to make such games enthrawlingly realistic yet 110% enjoyable. There are ways to make it work, but augementing something such as this to add in guns and than try to explain it away is just a poor decision, in the end it truely has nothing to offer the game, they may as well stop making classes if they need to defect to a gun class.

Crom The Pale · Nov 20, 2006, 03:08 PM // 15:08

Two really quick points:

1) Guns would only have as much impact in GW as the programers allow(ie balanced)

2) For a truely good look at how introducing guns into a fantasy setting would impact the world read the Guardians of the Flame series of books by Joel Rosenberg. In this series he takes a group of students and strands them in a fantasy world where they build guns to give them an advantage over magicial opponents.

draxynnic · Nov 20, 2006, 03:44 PM // 15:44

Actually, TOPK did, for intents and purposes related to claiming Halls, close. The game design decision was to move the PvP to the Battle Isles, yes... but in-game we have a portal that formerly allowed access to the Hall of Heroes which no longer does. For the purpose of claiming Halls, it's closed.

It sounds to me a bit like you're putting firearms to a higher realism standard to that set in the game. Yes, for a normal person, a single hit with a bullet will probably put them out of action (although it is worthwhile noting that the concept of the 'flesh wound' still applies to guns - a hit in the arm or leg will hamper someone, but won't take all teh fight out of them). Hit points, however, are an abstraction - as well as representing near-superhuman toughness (we ARE talking heroes here...) it represents know-how on how not to be hit so hard in the first place.

On just how much guns would add to the game - I'm possibly adding to your argument, but I'd register a 'meh'. Are they needed? No. Heck, most things you can do with a gun that's anywhere near contemporary you could do with a crossbow, possibly even a repeating crossbow (although I'm not sure how successful those things were in real life. I think the answer is 'not very'). On the other hand, would they destroy the suspension of disbelief? Not necassarily. In fact, for the history buff, it's almost more threatening to the suspension of disbelief that in many settings you see armour that was contemporary to early firearms, but none of the latter.

BahamutKaiser · Nov 21, 2006, 01:18 AM // 01:18

Two really repeated points Crom, the issue with guns is not the balance, it is the reality, realism, and environment of GW that takes a blow when you introduce guns into a feudal combat world. It changes the balance of power, it equalizes the common man making mockery of skill and Heros.

And yeah I already know plenty of good ways guns can work in fantasy, but guns working in GW clash left and right.

Crom The Pale · Nov 21, 2006, 07:54 AM // 07:54

Actualy BahmautKaiser i was agreeing with you, in the books the addition of guns totaly unbalanced the world shifting it into an industilized mess as the magic users tried to build better guns using magic and the gun smith pushed more and more technology into the world. In the end there was almost no magic left and every character carried a gun. Swords became symbols that only nobility bothered with.

Guns just dont belong in GW, they could be balanced and a class could be made for them but in the end they just dont work well with magic.