# Justifying firearms in a fantasy setting



## Meyer (Mar 28, 2013)

I will attempt to describe my setting succinctly.  The world follows real world physics with exemptions for magicka and alchemical enhancements to an extent.  It is divided into three zones analogous to hemispheres; the Old World, the New World, and the Lost World.  

The dominant world power, the Hartlynd Imperium, originated in the Old World, but early in its history gravitated towards virgin lands for conquest in the "New World" of the west.  The Imperium is the most technologically and socially advanced nation in existence by a wide margin.  It has complete dominance over the New World, vast territories in the Old World, and holds many territories in the Lost World, where it is engaged in a cold war with an ancient, magical race.  

The Imperium has developed rifling, metal cartridges, and early semi automatic weaponry.  For the most part, its soldiers make use of bolt action rifles with eight cartridge magazines.  These are intended to be comparable with mid 19th century weaponry.  Elite units are armed with semi-automatic rifles or longrifles with a maximum effective range of 1200 meters.  The sharing of Imperial technology with foreigners is considered treason and punishable by death.  No other nation has the knowledge to create such weapons, let alone manufacture them on a large scale.  The primary firearms in the Old World are still muskets or hunting rifles, if access to firearms is even available.  

Orcs do not use any rifles or muskets, but occasionally make use of scavenged pistols and the rare revolver.  They dwell in a land of steppes and desert.  Orcs are nearly all trained horse archers and their leaders consider primitive firearms inefficent in comparison to their recurved compound bows.  They are a large, powerfully built people and can draw bows no other race could hope to use.  They can shrug off several bullets from even standard issue Imperial rifles, but the Orc bow can pierce plate armor from distances within 50m.  

Various nations and provinces of men in the Old World do make use of muskets, hunting rifles, and various artillery, but still field heavy cavalry, archers, halberdiers, and pikemen amongst other medieval units.  It has been centuries since a major war has broken out and outside of the 'big three' powers, the arms race is often ignored.

The Estari Empire does not completely shun firearms, but rarely employs them outside of warships, naval bases, and artillery.  They still prefer to make use of multipurpose skirmishers augmented by heavy cavalry, heavy infantry, and their specialty, battlemages.



The Imperium's foe in the Lost World was rapidly defeated in the last war (some eighty years before the current year).  They rely heavily on strange alchemy to create brutish warriors and monsters that can shrug off small arms fire, but even with their magic, can not hope to hold out much longer against their foe's supeior firepower.

The foe in the Old World, the Empire under Kahaz, consists of 'demonic' beings the smallest of which stand over seven feet tall, incredibly strong, and protected by thick plate armor.  Their size grants them great resistance to small arms fire and previous wars against these fiends resulted in great loss of life.




To summarize: I am attempting to justify rifles and other fireams being juxtaposed with melee for the following reasons:

1) Only one nation has access to top tier weaponry and is the most dominant power in the world by far.
2) Many species/creatures are resistant to even advanced small arms fire.
3) Only small arms are severely restricted, rifled cannons are ubiquitious in the free world
4) Magic and alchemy are used to counter more 'scientific' technology



I greatly appreciate your thoughts and criticism.


----------



## johnsonjoshuak (Mar 28, 2013)

Semi-automatic rifles would be more analogous to very late 19th century and more early 20th century. Just a point.

I'm actually writing in a world that's more late rifled-musket/early metal cartridge (revolvers only).

Having one nation that is heads and shoulders above the rest can be hard to write for without having a strong counter. Even with penalties for selling the information to other nations, the techniques for creating weapons would leak out. Some merchant would be looking for a major score, hoping that a war between two more-equal forces would drive up his business.

One thing to keep in mind is that a nation that is so much more powerful than the others that no one wants to face off against them is going to gather enemies fast. They're going to be arrogant; they'll push their way in foreign policy. And the axiom "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" would come into play. Opposing nations would band together. Spies would be rampant, especially from the other nations of man: they would have the easiest time infiltrating the Imperium and would have the incentive to spread the wealth. The leftovers from battles would be taken for study and reverse-engineering.

And the magic users would work to find ways to counter the small arms. In a world like that, a nation's advantage isn't going to last long. It seems like you've already got some of the groundwork laid out for this kind of balance in that the demons of Kahaz are resistant to small arms and the alchemies in the Lost World. 

Not all nations are going to adapt, see the Native American nations as an example. Their way of life didn't lend itself to holding off the technologically superior colonists (later, Americans). You just need to decide whether your main opponents are going to adapt and learn how to counter the superior technology or are going to end up in reservations.


----------



## TheokinsJ (Mar 28, 2013)

Meyer said:


> The Imperium has developed rifling, metal cartridges, and early semi automatic weaponry.  For the most part, its soldiers make use of bolt action rifles with eight cartridge magazines.  These are intended to be comparable with mid 19th century weaponry.  Elite units are armed with semi-automatic rifles or longrifles with a maximum effective range of 1200 meters.  The sharing of Imperial technology with foreigners is considered treason and punishable by death.  No other nation has the knowledge to create such weapons, let alone manufacture them on a large scale.  The primary firearms in the Old World are still muskets or hunting rifles, if access to firearms is even available.



First of all, firearms of the 1800s were not at all semi-automatic, it took around 20-30 seconds to load and be ready to fire a musket, rifles were not widely used because although they had increased range, they were much slower at loading, and an average rifleman shot roughly 1-2 shots a minute, whereas musket men could fire 3, and in those days, the tactic was to fire first, and fire more rounds than your enemy. The guns you seem to be describing seem more like the bolt-action rifles of the early 1900s.
Also depending on how long this technology has existed, what measures have been used to stop it falling into enemy hands? Surely 'the enemy' would have gotten hold of a few guns at some stage after a battle or by spying and using espionage. You mentioned that people who share technology with foreigners are punished, a good idea but also needs to be expanded on. Despite these punishments someone must have tried, and someone must have succeeded. Perhaps there is an illegal trade of smuggling technology to the orcs? I would say that perhaps some technology is not permitted amongst common people, and that only soldiers/people of power are allowed it, which would make it harder for it to be stolen or to fall into enemy hands.
As for magic and alchemy, both are flexible enough to be used to counter technology, and creatures and species can be easily made to be resistant to small fire arms due to things such as scales, hard skin and tough flesh that the bullet finds difficult to penetrate ect. Anyway hope I gave you some things to think about and I hope that this helps you to find your answers.

Got ninjad again!


----------



## Meyer (Mar 28, 2013)

Alas, my I accidently lost my longer original reply.



johnsonjoshuak said:


> Semi-automatic rifles would be more analogous to very late 19th century and more early 20th century. Just a point.



I am basing these semiautomatic rifles on Colt Revolving Rifles which were in use as early as 1838.  Perhaps semiautomatic is the wrong terminology in this case.  True semi automatic rifles which use the blowback system would number in the single digits and be handcrafted weapons that take months to years to develop at this point in the setting.



> I'm actually writing in a world that's more late rifled-musket/early metal cartridge (revolvers only).
> 
> Having one nation that is heads and shoulders above the rest can be hard to write for without having a strong counter. Even with penalties for selling the information to other nations, the techniques for creating weapons would leak out. Some merchant would be looking for a major score, hoping that a war between two more-equal forces would drive up his business.
> 
> One thing to keep in mind is that a nation that is so much more powerful than the others that no one wants to face off against them is going to gather enemies fast. They're going to be arrogant; they'll push their way in foreign policy. And the axiom "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" would come into play. Opposing nations would band together. Spies would be rampant, especially from the other nations of man: they would have the easiest time infiltrating the Imperium and would have the incentive to spread the wealth. The leftovers from battles would be taken for study and reverse-engineering.



I failed to adequately express the scope of the Imperium and history of conflict which are both vital to my justifications.

The Imperium has existed for 1073 years.  It encompasses the entire New World, has large holdings in the two major continents of the Old World, and large territories in the New World.  In total, over 50% of the world's landmass is either a proper Imperial province or military territory.  Over 40% of the world's population dwells within these lands.  

The current year is 1073 of the Imperial Age.  Early firearms were developed in the 7th century IA, muskets in 10th century IA, and proper rifles with metal cartridges are a recent development.  I will perhaps set their date of being introduced into service as in the 1040's.

The Imperium's last major war predates the development of their now standard rifles.  They are currently engaged in a hostile cold war in the Lost World, but engagements have been limited to merely occasional skirmishes.  There have been no oppurtunities for their opposition to recover Imperial weaponry and even if they managed to, standing orders regarding lost technology approve any action in its recovery.  They would engage in open war to reclaim their technology, but with an excellent network of special forces, agents, and covert operatives, are capable of simply sending in a small squad to recover the weaponry and kill everyone who has studied it.

In the Old World, the Imperium recently reclaimed lost holdings in a quick and brutal war that showed how great their technological edge truly was, but are still dealing with insurrectionists and engaged in a low intensity conflict.  Some weapons have been lost, stolen, or even sold off, but most have been recovered.

Civilians are not granted access to such weapons under any circumstances.  Operational security is very important.  The loss of even a basic rifle would be akin to a modern military having machine guns stolen and sold.  Some weapons are in the hands of criminals and foreigners, but no one outside of the Imperium has the military industrial complex developed to where they could hope to produce such weapons on a large scale, let alone quickly.

And the magic users would work to find ways to counter the small arms. In a world like that, a nation's advantage isn't going to last long. It seems like you've already got some of the groundwork laid out for this kind of balance in that the demons of Kahaz are resistant to small arms and the alchemies in the Lost World. 



> Not all nations are going to adapt, see the Native American nations as an example. Their way of life didn't lend itself to holding off the technologically superior colonists (later, Americans). You just need to decide whether your main opponents are going to adapt and learn how to counter the superior technology or are going to end up in reservations.



The Zulus fared quite well against the British on some occasions despite using spears.


In regards to this quote.



> One thing to keep in mind is that a nation that is so much more powerful than the others that no one wants to face off against them is going to gather enemies fast. They're going to be arrogant; they'll push their way in foreign policy.



You've described the Imperial hierarchy to the T.  However, I despise "world of hats".  Not all Imperials are bloodthirsty, warmongerers.  There are many who are pacificists.  There are many who do not care and consider other nations, uncultured and barbaric.  Most take some pride in their nation, but are not advocates for war.  There is a growing movement to grant autonomy to certain regions.  Even the Emperor himself is a pacifist and very morally sound individual.  It is his Grand Chancellor and military leaders that seek to spread their influence.  There are many factions within the Imperium pulling in different directions.  It is, in a way, going the route of the British Empire in that it may dissolve fairly peacefully over the next hundred or so years.

The other nations are their enemies, to an extent.  

The Norse tribes of Duendaun (northern continent in the Old World) hate the Imperials and the Estari as they have been routinely conquered and their lands stripped of resources by these foreign invaders.  Much of Duendaun is still under Imperial or Estari control.  

The land of Sedith, inhabited primarily by men, has also been repeatedly conquered by the Imperials.  Insurrectionists abound and actively seek to drive out the invaders.  Martial law is in place.  It is essentially a military dictatorship.

Sedari, now home to unified Orcs, is seperated from Sedith by a great river.  They engage in trade and commerce with Sedith, but are no friends of the Imperium.  They lack the power to actively challenge the Imperium, but many Orcs assist their neighbors in acts of sabotage against Imperial garrisons.  

To the east of Sedari is the Hithari Dominion.  The Hithari have no formal relations with the Imperium and are isolationists.  They trade little with the orcs.  Foreigners are only allowed into select harbors.  

Ondor, situated north of Sedari, is a kingdom of men and former colony of the Imperium.  They are part of a loose alliance with the Erindar and the Estari Empire.   This alliance is strong enough to give the Imperium pause.  Onder trades with the Imperium, but does not have close ties to it.

The Erindar inhabit a small city island slightly west of the island of Naros (the island of origin, which is occupied by both the Imperium and Estari Empire).  According to legend, the three living gods of the Erindar and Estari dwell on this island.  In the 3rd century of the Imperial Age, the Emperor invaded the Erindar homeland.  He was allowed access to the Sanctum where the gods ostensibly live.  None truly know what happened there, but he immediately ordered Imperial forces to leave the island and shortly thereafter granted Sedan (now called Ondor) its freedom.  Imperial officials are wary of engaging in conflict with either the Erindar or Estari Empire due to this event.  

The relationship between the Imperium and the Estari Empire is somewhat similar to the relationship between America and the United Kingdom, but somewhat cooler.  Many elves live in the Imperium and hold positons of power.  The first Emperor of the Imperium was the son of an Estari Emperor assassinated in a coup.  The majority of Imperial rulers have descended from his line.  

The Vithari Confederacy in the Lost World hates the Imperium greatly and is near death.  A final war between the Vithari and Imperials would be bloody and neither side desires additional confict, but the Imperium refuses to return land to the Vithari.

The Empire under Kahaz are also bitter enemies of the Imperium, but distance prevents any major war between the two, for now.  Essentially, both sides are using Ondor, Estari, and Sedari as buffer states.  Kahaz has great influence over the Hithari, to the point where the Hithari Dominion may be a puppet state.


The Estari, Ondor Kingdom, Erindar, and Sedari are caught, to use the cliche, between a rock and a hard place.  The lesser of two evils is the Imperium.  No one outside of the actual Imperials actually likes the Imperium and many would rejoice if it fell.


----------



## Penpilot (Mar 28, 2013)

You might want to check out this thread.

http://mythicscribes.com/forums/world-building/2706-guns-my-fantasy-heresy-says-my-critics.html


----------



## Meyer (Mar 28, 2013)

That was an interesting read.  I skimmed through it, but what I saw touched on many arguments that I have seen before such as the conflict between technology vs magic, old vs new, and fantasy settings being stuck in medieval Europe.

Quite honestly, the initial decision for include fireams originally came from my opinion that it would be 'cool' and 'different'.  From there I began to research the evolution and history of firearms and develop reasons to justify their existence in a world where melee combat was still common.  Even as late as the Napoleonic wars there was still some demand for trained archers.  It wasn't until somewhat later that the rifleman completely outstripped the archer.

The initial focus of my story is a growing conflict in the Old World lands of Sedari and Ondor, which are basically 'third world' in comparison to the Imperium.  Look at the modern world.  Simply because nuclear weapons exist doesn't mean everyone has them.  Even if someone acquires them it takes years for them to become capable of developing their own.  Many nations are heavily reliant on imports for even their small arms and lack the ability to manufacture their own advanced weaponry.  

This is the case in my setting.  It is heavily inspired by 17th to 19th century Europe primarily.  I dislike the fact that many fantasy worlds are stuck in time despite having tens of thousands of years of recorded history.  Time moves on, technology advances.


----------



## johnsonjoshuak (Apr 1, 2013)

Meyer said:


> I am basing these semiautomatic rifles on Colt Revolving Rifles which were in use as early as 1838.  Perhaps semiautomatic is the wrong terminology in this case.  True semi automatic rifles which use the blowback system would number in the single digits and be handcrafted weapons that take months to years to develop at this point in the setting.



Revolving rifles or repeating rifles would be a better term to use, especially if you refer to them in the actual story. Repeaters were the rifles with the lever actions. A true semi-automatic weapon requires no action other than pulling the trigger to fire.




Meyer said:


> I failed to adequately express the scope of the Imperium and history of conflict which are both vital to my justifications.
> 
> The Imperium has existed for 1073 years.  It encompasses the entire New World, has large holdings in the two major continents of the Old World, and large territories in the New World.  In total, over 50% of the world's landmass is either a proper Imperial province or military territory.  Over 40% of the world's population dwells within these lands.
> 
> ...



Even small skirmishes could result in recovered technology. Additionally, even seeing weapons in use could result in useful study information. And in order to recover technology, they would have to know that it was taken, know who took it, know where it was, and know who had studied it.

Even if they could prove that some of their weapons were taken, the offending government could use plausible deniability to shunt off the responsibility.

The only thing I'm worried about is that you're setting up a power-house that seems to have no flaws or weaknesses. Writing a story with protagonists who are going up against a powerhouse of this nature would be rather boring to read.

In the Old World, the Imperium recently reclaimed lost holdings in a quick and brutal war that showed how great their technological edge truly was, but are still dealing with insurrectionists and engaged in a low intensity conflict.  Some weapons have been lost, stolen, or even sold off, but most have been recovered.



Meyer said:


> Civilians are not granted access to such weapons under any circumstances.  Operational security is very important.  The loss of even a basic rifle would be akin to a modern military having machine guns stolen and sold.  Some weapons are in the hands of criminals and foreigners, but no one outside of the Imperium has the military industrial complex developed to where they could hope to produce such weapons on a large scale, let alone quickly.



Unless the government is directly controlling all arms manufacturing, something that is unlikely in even the most strict nations, they would still have the possibility of corporate espionage and manipulation of order forms and build receipts to show a certain number of weapons had never been built when in fact they had been and were shipped to a neighboring nation.

You've definitely put a ton of work into your world, something I can appreciate as a hardcore worldbuilder. I'm not trying to shoot holes in your world by any means, just trying to offer constructive feedback =)


----------



## Meyer (Apr 1, 2013)

The Imperium isn't an antagonist.  Actually, its role in the story is minimal until about 1/3 to 1/2 of the way through.  

It basically goes:

1) Preconflict - Pieces are moved into position.
2) Shatterpoint - The war begins.  It is localized at first and limited to a single front.
3) Escalation - Two major powers enter the war, one on each side.  The Imperium on the 'good' and the Empire Under Kahaz on the 'evil.'  Additional fronts open.  (less than a third of the Imperial military is committed to the conflict)


Not revealing anymore stages now...don't want to actually spoil something here and have it come back to haunt me. ;D

I'll say this much though, the enemy is insidious.  The Imperial technological edge will quickly prove 'overrated.'  It will become more of a necessity to even win.


----------



## psychotick (Apr 1, 2013)

Hi,

My thought is to consider the American Indians an their conflict with the west. They did not have either the knowlege of firearms or the wherewithall to manufacture them, but soon enough had them. They simply stole them. So this would surely be the old world technique for gaining such weapons and levelling the playing field. And it occurs to me that with magic and potions, theft of such things should be relatively easy.

So fairly soon into any major conflict I would think that the Imperium's strategic advantage would depend instead of on the weapons themselves on knowing how to use such weapons effectively, strategy, numbers and only those weapons that can't be stolen (tanks? Armoured gun carriages?). But also don't forget other non-violent techs. For example do they have better communications, allowing them to get large numbers of soldiers in play ahead of the battle? Improved medicine, thus increasing the chance of soldiers surviving to later rejoin the battle? Faster transport so they can respond to threats more quickly, or attack?

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Meyer (Apr 2, 2013)

psychotick said:


> Hi,
> 
> My thought is to consider the American Indians an their conflict with the west. They did not have either the knowlege of firearms or the wherewithall to manufacture them, but soon enough had them. They simply stole them. So this would surely be the old world technique for gaining such weapons and levelling the playing field. And it occurs to me that with magic and potions, theft of such things should be relatively easy.
> 
> ...



A few things

1) They will always have superior firepower, even if the enemy has captured some weaponry.
2) They are actually trained in its use and employment so will have have that advantage.
3) They have superior military training for both enlisted and officers and a great deal more experience than most other nations.  
4) They have superior naval vessels of all types.  They can transport more troops faster and farther.  They can also shut down enemy lines of supply and provide offshore artillery.
5) They have superior medicinal technology, a heavy focus on biomancy, and well funded alchemical research and development.
6) They employ an extensive and highly trained intelligence network with multiple operatives undercover in every nation (two exceptions), including "allied" nations.  
7) Every Imperial legion is roughly 20,000 strong and intended to function as an independent army complete with line infantry, artillery, cavalry, recon, special tactics units, logistics, intel, supply, etc.  

To give an idea of the difference in scope, The Imperium has the _smallest_ military relative to its population.  It fields in excess of 400,000 soldiers in its active army alone.  Probably another 200,000 servicemen in naval forces.  With reserve forces factored in, its military can reach an excess of a one million personnel.

Ondor has a standing army of 40,000~
The Estari Empire has a standing army of 80,000~
The Orcs of Sedari have a standing army of 60,000~ (but can double that number almost instanty, they have a total of 120,000 trained soldiers.  40,000 are permament and the other 80,000~ are active for a quarter of the year in groups of 20,000~)
The various Norse tribes might be able to field upwards of 50,000~
Sedith might be able to field 40,000~


The Imperium could send a single legion to conquer Ondor and they have twenty such legions.  

There are several reasons why they don't decide to just go off and conquer everyone.

1) Nearly half of Imperial forces are deployed along their western front in the Lost World.  They are engaged in a decades long cold war with a major power that requires a considerable amount of their attention.  Imperial High Command estimates casualties in excess of 80,000 (low end) should they attempt to invade this enemy's remaining territory.  
2) Imperial High Command believes it would take at least six legions to successfully defeat the Empire Under Kahaz...and their intelligence is severely lacking on the EUK.   For all they know the EUK is a greater military power...
3) The Emperor is a pacifist and desires to demilitarize the Imperium
4) There is a growing movement within the Imperium to grant several colonies independence.
5) The pro-military faction is rapidly losing support
6) There are too many Elves within the Imperium and the Imperial military for an invasion of Estari to be approved, let alone carried out.
7) The economy is stagnant and resources are stretched too thin.  


They simply don't have the resources to risk causing a multifront war.  Each of the big three is waiting for the other to make the first move.


----------



## Abbas-Al-Morim (Apr 3, 2013)

I thought this was an interesting thread because I have firearms in my fantasy world too. For now, I've decided on a early renaissance time to build my world around. There are firearms but they are relatively unreliable, expensive and slow to reload. Of course, they have their uses but they're not advanced enough to replace the longbow - a weapon that requires almost no training to use, which is easily manufactured, less expensive to fire and has a faster rate of fire. 

That aside, it seems you are so hell-bent on the idea of only the Imperium having access to firearms that you're almost building your entire world around that proposition. It seems like you're making up extra arguments on the fly as you try to explain why only the Imperium has that technology. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but you're going pretty far with it. 

Another thing you overlook is that you won't be able to explain your reader why only the Imperium has those weapons. Even if you have a 1000 good reasons, it's impossible to put them all in your story. We might be convinced why you're right, but your reader won't be. 

Also, your 1st argument against world domination - it would cost the imperium 80.000 soldiers to take the last stronghold of their archenemy - isn't very strong. If you have a million soldiers, 80.000 isn't a whole lot to lose. It's better to strike first and take their stronghold before they can recuperate and invade the lost world again, costing you a whole lot more lives. From a strategic point of view, allowing your enemy to regroup is a capital mistake. I don't claim to be a strategical mastermind but that's unrealistic. Unless of course your world has some kind of UN or ethical problems with that kind of approach. Our world has, that's why the US doesn't just declare war on North Korea. Our philosophy is that every life has its worth. But in medieval times - with nobility in command - the life of one commoner didn't matter much. And from a utilitarian point of view, the enemy should be finished off.

Some more questions:

* why would the imperium want to decolonize some of its colonies? Unless the colonists are rebelling and manage to defeat (or at least bleed) the armies, there doesn't seem any reason to do that. Great Britain only decolonized when faced with excessive military trouble (war of independence in the US for instance) or international pressure (India for instance). 

* why is the emperor a pacifist? And why would he want to demilitarize? Unless he's a tactical screw-up that doesn't seem very smart with a cold war going on and several neighboring countries that don't like the imperium. Unless of course he'd like to loose his throne for some reason.  If the economy is stagnant, the best thing to do would be to invade the neighboring countries and make them tribute states or something like that. Once their threat has been dealt with, he can demilitarize to some extent. After all, if it only takes one legion to take a state and he has 600.000 soldiers (the other 400.000 being stationed in the lost world if I recall correctly) then he could take all the foreign countries in a blitzkrieg. Also, keep in mind that the army was also a police force/firefighter of sorts in that time. 

Just my two cents, feel free to do with it as you please. It's just some observations. No personal offense intended.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Apr 3, 2013)

Abbas-Al-Morim said:


> Of course, they have their uses but they're not advanced enough to replace the longbow - a weapon that requires almost no training to use, which is easily manufactured, less expensive to fire and has a faster rate of fire.


Training a competent archer with the longbow took years. One of the advantages firearms enjoyed, as they became more reliable, was a massive reduction in training time for soldiers to be effective.


----------



## Abbas-Al-Morim (Apr 3, 2013)

I've always heard from reliable sources that training a longbow archer took no time at all. We're not talking about a skilled archer here, but an archer that can loose volleys en masse. You don't need to aim, all you have to do is pull back the string. A peasant can learn that in a matter of hours. Of course it would take years to do it really effectively (to the point where you can fire a large number of arrows/minute) Reloading a firearm is infinitely more complicated.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Apr 3, 2013)

That is incorrect. Just the strength involved in shooting a longbow takes time to acquire. Shooting volleys, in unison with other archers at the appropriate ranges, took an immense amount of training and skill.

In contrast, the operation of a firearm, from loading to firing to general maintenance took a minimal amount of training.


----------



## Abbas-Al-Morim (Apr 3, 2013)

You'll have to excuse me if I don't take you on your word. You _could _be right, but until you stave your argument with evidence, I'm going to stick to what I've learned over the years. You don't have to prove it though - I know gathering evidence takes time and I can't expect you to put that much effort in convincing one stranger. 

But even if it takes years to train a skilled longbow man, it doesn't take that long to train an archer (using a smaller bow). Although the long bow has greater range and strength, a regular bow can be just as deadly in the right circumstances. And then, you barely need any training at all. 

Also, when talking about early arquebus/muskets, it did take more time to train men compared to those training to use the more reliable muskets that were made over the years.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Apr 3, 2013)

There's no need for you to accept anything I say. There is a wealth of historical documentation available on the subject. I do suggest however, that you spend time researching the matter rather than accepting anyone's account...including your source.



Abbas-Al-Morim said:


> Also, when talking about early arquebus/muskets, it did take more time to train men compared to those training to use the more reliable muskets that were made over the years.


Yes, of course this is true. As firearms became more reliable and firing mechanisms improved, it would be easier (and less risky) to train soldiers.


----------



## Meyer (Apr 3, 2013)

Abbas-Al-Morim said:


> I thought this was an interesting thread because I have firearms in my fantasy world too. For now, I've decided on a early renaissance time to build my world around. There are firearms but they are relatively unreliable, expensive and slow to reload. Of course, they have their uses but they're not advanced enough to replace the longbow - a weapon that requires almost no training to use, which is easily manufactured, less expensive to fire and has a faster rate of fire.
> 
> That aside, it seems you are so hell-bent on the idea of only the Imperium having access to firearms that you're almost building your entire world around that proposition. It seems like you're making up extra arguments on the fly as you try to explain why only the Imperium has that technology. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but you're going pretty far with it.



Other nations do have firearms.  They're simply several decades behind.  Standard issues for the Imperium are bolt action rifles.  Everyone else is using muskets or hunting rifles.

I've already explained why certain nations do not use fireams as a primary weapon.




> Another thing you overlook is that you won't be able to explain your reader why only the Imperium has those weapons. Even if you have a 1000 good reasons, it's impossible to put them all in your story. We might be convinced why you're right, but your reader won't be.



I disagree.  The only reason I even brought up this for discussion is because I am a bit anal over avoiding plot holes.  I think most readers ignore plot holes if the story is well written/well told/interesting and the plot hole isn't massive.



> Also, your 1st argument against world domination - it would cost the imperium 80.000 soldiers to take the last stronghold of their archenemy - isn't very strong. If you have a million soldiers, 80.000 isn't a whole lot to lose. It's better to strike first and take their stronghold before they can recuperate and invade the lost world again, costing you a whole lot more lives. From a strategic point of view, allowing your enemy to regroup is a capital mistake. I don't claim to be a strategical mastermind but that's unrealistic. Unless of course your world has some kind of UN or ethical problems with that kind of approach. Our world has, that's why the US doesn't just declare war on North Korea. Our philosophy is that every life has its worth. But in medieval times - with nobility in command - the life of one commoner didn't matter much. And from a utilitarian point of view, the enemy should be finished off.



It really looks to me like you just glanced at my justification before going on a rant here.

1) They don't have one million soldiers.  They have a million~ total personnel.  This includes a large navy and militia.  They have 400,000~ active duty soldiers.

2) The 80,000 figure is a low end estimate.  Losing 1/5 of your active army is significant.  

3) They don't have just "one archenemy" left.  There are two nations that are significant threats.  The one in the Old World will be revealed as much more powerful than their cold war enemy.  There is also a loose coalition and support for insurrectionists that could easily escalate into a full scale war.  _No one outside of the Imperium truly likes the Imperium.  They are tolerated because no one wants to make the first move._

4) They didn't allow the enemy to regroup.  They paid dearly for every inch of land that they claimed.  The war became too taxing for both sides.  




> Some more questions:
> 
> * why would the imperium want to decolonize some of its colonies? Unless the colonists are rebelling and manage to defeat (or at least bleed) the armies, there doesn't seem any reason to do that. Great Britain only decolonized when faced with excessive military trouble (war of independence in the US for instance) or international pressure (India for instance).



International pressure, insurrectionists, economic problems (it is not cheap to hold land across an entire globe), religious reasons, ethnic reasons, etc.  



> * why is the emperor a pacifist? And why would he want to demilitarize? Unless he's a tactical screw-up that doesn't seem very smart with a cold war going on and several neighboring countries that don't like the imperium. Unless of course he'd like to loose his throne for some reason.  If the economy is stagnant, the best thing to do would be to invade the neighboring countries and make them tribute states or something like that. Once their threat has been dealt with, he can demilitarize to some extent. After all, if it only takes one legion to take a state and he has 600.000 soldiers (the other 400.000 being stationed in the lost world if I recall correctly) then he could take all the foreign countries in a blitzkrieg. Also, keep in mind that the army was also a police force/firefighter of sorts in that time.



Is an ethical ruler really that hard to believe?  Is it really that hard to believe that someone can realize the futility of war and want to refrain from it?  There is nothing to gain except minor resources and false 'glory and honor.'  

_He is also on the verge of becoming the second Emperor to be overthrown.  _













Again, I will explain why the Orcs do not use guns.

English Longbows were estimated to have a draw of 60 to 180 lbs.  The bows that Orcs use exceed that.  Only a handful of exceptionally strong humans or elves could ever draw Orc bows, let alone use them effectively and rapidly.  Orcs are also significantly tougher than other races and can _shrug off most musket wounds_.  As they primarily fought each other (up until recently) they were more concerned with using a weapon that could effectively kill other Orcs, such as their bows.


----------



## Abbas-Al-Morim (Apr 3, 2013)

I did in fact read your posts thoroughly. But because they are rather lengthy, it's possible some things didn't stick. Also, it's not called a rant, it's constructive criticism. I'm trying to voice my concerns and my opinions on your world, based on the information you've given me, my own likings and my (in many ways limited) knowledge of technology, warfare and politics. 

You can do with them as you please but I have a feeling you're not very happy with my critique. That's your good right and so I will remove myself from this discussion for the time being. I honestly don't see the point in you asking if the technological differences in your world are justified if you aren't willing to adjust your point. If you're happy with how your world works, you should definitely go with it!

EDIT: @ T.Allen.Smith : didn't see your post there. I will do some research on the matter and I will double check my sources. Perhaps I've been wrong all along!


----------



## Meyer (Apr 3, 2013)

No, it would be constructive criticism if you properly addressed things.  It is evident things didn't stick.  I'd prefer you not comment if you are unwilling to read my entire posts.


----------



## Nobby (Apr 9, 2013)

Semi automatic small arms seem to be overpowered for your setting, why not breach loading rifles? They would seem to be a better fit...and to me you really cant count a legion as being however many thousand strong "including logistics" because that isn't how logistics work, not even for Napoleonic era armies.

Bugger, I watch too many military documentaries!

@Abbas-Al-Morim

Sorry, but your comment about archers being easy to train is just wrong.


----------



## wordwalker (Apr 9, 2013)

Weapon power does change the shape of fighting. Breech loaders let an army put a lot of power in one place (yes, mostly because archers were harder to train) but with limited accuracy at first, hence the short-range volley fire. Repeating rifles (eg bolt-action) in the later 19th century gave snipers more value, and true semi-automatics (bang bang bang, not yet dakkadakkadakka) let some troops give sustained cover fire while others moved forward-- very different from earlier tactics.


----------



## Nobby (Apr 19, 2013)

Phew. I think the key problem is this, are firearms easier to come by than magic missiles. Which is better is up to you!


----------



## SeverinR (Apr 22, 2013)

Why have firearm in fantasy?
Because they're a blast.
***RIMSHOT***


----------



## Firekeeper (Apr 24, 2013)

I dunno, to me firearms just seem out of place in fantasy. I like what you're doing here, and I think you're doing it as well as anyone can, certainly better than I could, but I still don't like the idea of guns in fantasy. Dunno why, I guess they just seem out of place, like a dark elf would be in a modern crime-drama setting.

Kudos for try though.


----------



## Shockley (Apr 25, 2013)

My thought is that you don't really have to justify anything, as long as it meshes with the story. Reading your first post, I got a very clear idea of your world and I think it works - it just depends on how well you write your story and how well you smooth over any inconsistencies. I would be interested in seeing how such a war would develop, as people would adapt to new tactics and new generals rise up who are better equipped to handle the power imbalance.

 I think your world has promise, and it would be interesting to see someone like a Cochise or Shaka operate against the Imperium.

 ---

 As to the bow issue, T. Allen Smith is absolutely 100% correct. Longbows might be more simple than guns, but the reason the gun overtook the arrow is because you could mass peasants with guns in a way you couldn't mass longbowmen. A few historical examples, since those are my forte:

 - The battle of Nagashino, which is really the textbook example of poorly trained peasant soldiers taking on a well trained, well equipped military elite and winning. 

 - The battles of Crecy, Poiters and Agincourt, where the presence of English long bowmen turned the tide of battle and paved the way for major English victories. Significant because the French just didn't have the ability to mass bowmen.

 - The long string of edicts produced in medieval England banning soccer, operating under the idea that it was preventing the peasants from training with the bow.


----------



## Firekeeper (Apr 25, 2013)

I absolutely agree with Shockley; if your story meshes well then you don't have to justify anything, and if you tell it well that will overcome any minor inconsistencies so long as they aren't glaring or jarring. I said earlier that I don't think I'd like guns in a fantasy setting but I would be open to it if it meshes well.

Garth Nix did a bit of that in his Old Kingdom series. Now, granted the guns and other technology wouldn't work the closer to the Old Kingdom they get, but it meshes well and I actually don't mind the guns, even though it's technically a fantasy work. 

So, in the end, follow your gut and if you do it well, you don't need to justify anything. Focus on the story. Everything else is just fluff


----------



## Nobby (Apr 26, 2013)

But if you ask the question, even if everyone here would go to their graves to defend his right to write as he sees fit, well, he sort of wants dissenting voices to...well, round off the edges...

Or am I just a hopeless romantic?


----------



## Nobby (Apr 26, 2013)

Of course he could just want to pointy up the points


----------

