Potential Problems with Arms & Equipment Book

[klingsor]

The preview looks interesting but there seem to be a few problems with it.

The black powder weapons section (page 85) make several references to rifles that seem to be incorrect. A rifle is a very specific thing and the author seems to be using the term incorrectly. It is like saying digger instead of tractor, similar but different

Arquebus. Not a rifle. Bayonets would have been plug bayonets (originally a hunting weapon for boar) so you shoot or you stab but not both.

Blunderbuss loaded with “small pebbles, shot and other scrap”. No, no no. This is rubbish that has been repeated far, far too often. They were loaded with shot. The bell muzzle made them easy to load on a rocking carriage or ships deck and doubtless looked scary.

Decksweeper. Almost certainly not a rifle. Reminiscent of some real, but not very successful naval weapons.

Let me sign an NDA and let me look at the files for you and I am sure we can fix this. Even doing a find and replace on rifle for gun is better than this.

Chainmail
It is a widespread but incorrect term. I think we are stuck with it even if a Taliban faction like myself grumbles about it.

 

[B_Steele]

I totally understand your concerns. Due to the nature of a fantasy-esque rules system, we are forced to set aside some of the realism in nature of fun game play and a system for such equipment that is fun for the average player.

When I put this book together I had to think of the common gamer and his/her view on what these items should or should not be able to do in their campaign, not the real world facts about such things. Just like Matthew put together the uber-deadly rules for RQ weapons in the last S&P, I'm sure someone will put together a bunch of new views and rules for the reams of stuff I put into A&E.

I guess what I'm saying is that I know where you are coming from as far as the details go, but this is still a game set in make-believe worlds and I had to try to cater to the masses. Perhaps if another RQ world comes out that is more hard-factual and gun-reliant we will see firearms rules that are more to your liking; but for now I would say just house rule these to what you would rather use.

However, that being said, with the long and venomous claws and fangs that often come out during discussions of the many views on our RQ line - I am very happy to see your comments are concise, well-stated and not inflammatory. Thank you for your criticisms, and I hope to have answered your inquiry adequately.

Cheers all!
Bry

 

[TRose]

As far as the blunderbuss being load with Shot or pebbles ect. Most muzzle loadingsmoothbores could be used as a primitive shotgun if the need was there. For instant the U.S army in the early years preffered to load their smoothbores with buck and ball( one large ball and 3 smaller ones) and even in the American Civil War 70% of all roinds where buck and ball.

 

[Lord Twig]

So the way I read this no effort will be made to correct the term rifle and change it to gun.

If you are happy spreading misinformation I guess we will have to live with it.

I used to argue that RPG were good for kids because they learned so much from them. I may have to give up that argument.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Why not use the word gun, firearm or musket instead?

I have to agree that rifle is wrong in the context it is given.

 

[burdock]

uh??? what you all bothered by that for?

 

[Lord Twig]

uh??? what you all bothered by that for?

Because it is wrong and it is sloppy.

I find it hard to believe that they realized that rifle was the wrong term but decided to use it anyway.

 

[Sigtrygg]

uh??? what you all bothered by that for?

Because it is wrong and it is sloppy.

Yep, that's how I feel too.

 

[burdock]

I'm not bothered about that sort of thing. But then I don't really have an interest in guns......I'm probably one of the general punters that the book was aimed at.

 

[CharlieMonster]

Having perused the preview the big thing I noticed is the prevalence of pseudo-rennaisance style equipment, it does seem a bit warhammer-esque. Please note before flaming me, this is an observation, not a criticism. There doesn't seem to be much I would feel happy inserting into a Gloanthan game (except possibly the black powder stuff for Mostali, with the suitably edited for Lord Twig's sensiblities :lol: Though to be fair I see his point being a bit of pedant myself). They would fit quite well in a Corum/Hawkmoon/Elric setting though.

On the subject of pedantry, anybody who feels pseudo-rennaisance is an out-dated and largely inaccurate term should feel free to substitute pseudo-early modern style.

 

[B_Steele]

I find it hard to believe that they realized that rifle was the wrong term but decided to use it anyway.

I used the term because it is the term that most roleplaying games have been using for any "long, two-handed gun with a stock" now for decades. I did not want to try and get into the scientific descriptions of why a rifle is different than a gun is different than a...and so on.

I went with the common RPG game terminology for ease of use and "close your eyes" style description for the common gamer. I'm sorry that some folks might think it is "sloppy and wrong", but knowing the industry...I figured that most would not. If I am wrong and this thread now explodes with the fanbase crying out for my blood and ink over the term being used in the generic and not factually specific; I'll know better for next time the subject comes up. *shrug*

I'm not trying to excuse the fact, but yes...I do know the difference between a rifle and a common "gun", I chose the descriptor for the image it brings to the mind, not the science behind it. Simple as that.

Change the fluff around if you want to. It doesn't change the stats behind these weapons, so I figure most players will probably not care at all. So long as they can put a slug into that Broo who brought an axe to a gunfight. :wink:

Going back to work before he runs off to be best-man in his buddies' wedding,
Bry

 

[jbuckmaster]

You may want to do the change for two major reasons:
-Gamers tend to be rather pedantic about things like this. Even if you don't hear about it on these forums, others will , and even a small number of vocal people can change perceptions about a book.
-Using the term Rifle on a longbarrel gun makes it difficult to introduce rifled weapons later on because of terminology. How are you to differentiate Sharpe's gun from a musket if both are termed rifles in the rules?

-John
Who writes for another company and knows all too well the issues of terminology

 

[burdock]

I'm wondering how many people (other than enthusiasts of a particular subject such as historic firearms) would want so much detail...a lot of people might just want something simple that they can just grab a hold of and insert into their story.

 

[iamtim]

a lot of people might just want something simple that they can just grab a hold of and insert into their story

*ding, ding*

Give that man a ceegar!

 

[burdock]

hmm....I see where you are all coming from though....nice for a book like that to be almost like an encyclopedia

 

[burdock]

tim wrote

*ding, ding*

Give that man a ceegar!

tee hee hee

but can I have some chocolate cake instead because I don't smoke (a gluten-free one please)

 

[iamtim]

I don't smoke

Drat.

I don't either, why do you think I was giving you a cigar? It's not like *I* want it.

 

[RMS]

I used the term because it is the term that most roleplaying games have been using for any "long, two-handed gun with a stock" now for decades. I did not want to try and get into the scientific descriptions of why a rifle is different than a gun is different than a...and so on.

I haven't played a lot of roleplaying games that use modern equipment, so you may be right on the general term. That's unfortunate though. However, this is an issue of using a common everyday term incorrectly, not usng something obscure (like mail vs. chainmail). When someone says "rifle" they mean something specific, not any "long two-handed gun with a stock". Everybody knows the difference in a rifled and smooth bore (rifle vs. shotgun for most people) gun and knows the differnce in what they do and are used for.

I'm sorry, but using common words incorrectly just sounds uneducated and uninformed, not like a deliberate design choice. If I tried to introduce something like that to any of players I've played with, they'd immediately spot it and question whether the author had a clue what they were talking about...and probably destroy the mood of the game. Why do that, when the correct terms would both be more correct and far more descriptive and mood setting.

 

[iamtim]

When someone says "rifle" they mean something specific, not any "long two-handed gun with a stock". Everybody knows the difference in a rifled and smooth bore (rifle vs. shotgun for most people) gun and knows the differnce in what they do and are used for.

You may not want to be too quick to jump to that conclusion. I don't like guns, myself, and kind-of avoid them. When I play RPGs, I'm perfectly fine with "rifle" and the amount of damage it does. Or "pistol".

When *I* say "rifle", I *am* referring to a "long two-handed gun with a stock", and I don't know the difference between rifled and smooth bore. Although I can point out a shotgun and know that it uses different ammunition.

 

[jbuckmaster]

All it takes is one guy in a group to muck things up. One guy notice and makes a big deal or someone with less knowledge makes a ruling based on terminology or similar and boom. issues. (I know this is mostly human problems, but it will come up)

And don't forget the Grognards or pedants on other websites who will rip into things, thus causing more issues. 90% of the "issues" in any game are normally things that someone didn't like and yelled loud enough that others started thinking he was right...

-John