Mortal Combot!

[Dram]

Personally, I'm all for good innovations, and a gun like a flintlock is a good innovation. Dunno if we should use it in the campaign, but we ARE creating a Toolset in which fans can create their own missions. So not including something on the basis that some people are against guns is just dumb. I am truly sick of FPS but if it's a giga slow reload flintlock, I'm all for it. Especially if it's in the design of mechanist crap. I'm with oDD on this one.

[Springheel]

but we ARE creating a Toolset in which fans can create their own missions. So not including something on the basis that some people are against guns is just dumb

 

Ok, I want dragons then.

[Ishtvan]

Why is it dumb to be against the inclusion of something on the basis that it does not "fit" the setting? Like SH said, we could include potentially anything we can think of. With the technology and materials available at the time, they could have had cowboy hats, they could have had a Wireless Internet since they have antennas and receivers, they could have had M16's and tanks if we give them gunpowder (no one's convinced me yet why they would stop at matchlock or flintlock when they already have the level of mechanics needed to create combat bots, submarines, etc). So why not just include everything in modern times and say they developed it ahead of schedule?

 

We have to make these kinds of decisions if we want to define a good, standard setting. What people go on to include later in 3rd party FM's or their own mod of our mod is up to them.

 

Personally I feel that primitive handguns coexisting with very advanced mechanics destroys the believability of the setting for me. I need believable reasons why guns have not been developed further, why they are rare and hard to produce, etc. There may be ways to write the setting like that, I don't know.

 

No one's addressed the issue of guns vs. magic. All it takes is one little spark to set off all the powder in someone's powder horn, and probably kill them. If two armies clashed with guns and a mage was involved, why wouldn't the mage simply blow up all the musketeers by creating little sparks of fire in the powder horns?

[Dram]

Wow, what replies lol. Calm down, just voicing my opinion. I can understand if you're against guns in Thief.

[Domarius]

...why wouldn't the mage simply blow up all the musketeers by creating little sparks of fire in the powder horns?

That'd be cool. And a reason to NOT have them, cause they're usless against magic. Kind of like how guns are useless in the matrix when you're fighting one on one because you could just spend all day dodging each others bullets, so it makes it worth getting in there and fighting hand to hand.

[Darkness_Falls]

Dang, what a controversial subject.

 

I'm against guns. That 15th century version looks like your basic everyday rifle with some minor twists to me. Then again, I'm not a rifle conoisseur -- and neither are 95% of the players out there. So to us, a rifle is a rifle; a gun is a gun. In the hands of a steampunked mechanist bot is one thing, but a city watch guard or other human is just different.

 

It was nice juxtaposition to have mechanist bots, cameras and flash bombs. I rather liked that. It's just not the same to me to have gun-wielding humans.

 

Thief for me was refreshing in that swords, bows & arrows and magic were used by humans. On the other hand, however, walking around a mansion or a courtyard and having a guard pick me off with a gun (like I'm all the sudden playing Call of Duty) doesn't sound fun and doesn't scream 'Thief' to me; which is, after all, our coalesced focus.

[Dram]

I can see your point, but with how inaccurate the guns were back then, it would mean that he'd probably miss you from that rooftop. But nonetheless, I can understand your opinions. I sorta like the medieval guns, but I guess I'd have to test it ingame to make a proper opinion.

[oDDity]

You guys are a bunch of fuckers, now squirming around in the dirt grasping for desperate arguments ranging from -

 

'having a few gurds with matchlock guns will tunn teh game into call of duty'

 

'If we're having 600 year old muskets, then me want dragons in to'

 

 

'guns wouldn't be no good nor nothing cus enemy wizards could do x y or z on them and stuff'

 

Pathetic.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not so dumb and blinded by your own biased opinions that you actually need me to waste time with the obvious counter argument for any of those worthless escuses for arguments.

The actual reason you don't want guns of any description, is that you don't want any on principal, you just don't 'like the idea of them', so just say that instead of making up those silly nonsense random sentences.

[Dram]

Whoa. That suddenly took a nasty turn .

 

Calm down dude.

[Ishtvan]

Heheh, thanks for the "tard" translations of our comments.

 

Now that I think about it, the wizard argument would kind've justify why they aren't widely used in military engagements. So that would actually make the presence of primitive guns in this world more believable to me, since no one would want to develop them for warfare/mass production when they can easily be defeated by any mage with enough skill to light a candle.

 

[edit: To be fair, I kind've ripped off this idea from the Recluce series by LE Modesitt Jr. That was a very believable setting that did a good job of explaining how steamships and swords could coexist at one time]

 

When it comes down to it, what to include in a setting is a pretty subjective judgement. So I guess I can say I "don't like the idea of it."

 

I would be okay with having them in existence, but so rare that you wouldn't see them on most missions. Definitely not standard-issue for cityguards. Maybe a holdout piece for one paranoid and wealthy noble, or a single elite guard captain in the mansion. Maybe they could be present in an FM that took place on a far away continent or a merchant ship or something, but I honestly don't like the idea of including them in our standard setting.

 

Also keep in mind, if a sentry has a firearm, one gunshot would pretty much alert all the guards in the map (assuming mansion-sized maps).

 

If it was a matchlock tho, it would take some time for the sentry to prep it before firing. So a sentry would have to see you from a fairly long ways away, draw their matchlock pistol, light the match cord, clean the primer pan, etc, and then have a definite sighting of you before they fire. The glow from the lit match cord should warn you to stay in the shadows until they decide it was nothing and un-prep the gun. So if they actually do take a shot at you, you must have been standing in a pretty well lit area for quite some time, so you pretty much deserve to be shot at.

 

Sorry to flip-flop so much in one post. Just throwing out some ideas.

 

Summary:

In conclusion, I would be okay with having matchlock pistols VERY rare in the setting (as in, several whole campaign missions should go by with no sightings of pistols). One could explain the primitive level of gun technology by saying that it's very easy for mages to defeat guns in war, so no one bothered to develop them further. Choosing matchlock pistols means that take a while to prep before firing, and then fire inaccurately and take a while to reload. Guards wouldn't start the firing preparations until they got pretty alerted, and even then wouldn't fire until they had a definite sighting of you. [edit: Also, they would not bother shooting at you if you were close, they'd just drop the gun, draw their sword and charge you]

 

All of these factors mitigate the gameplay issues a little (altho it's still going to alert everyone within a huge radius when a guard fires off a gun)

Edited April 21, 2005 by Ishtvan

[sparhawk]

What we could do is to include some guns in our campaign. There we have full control to make sure that they are not overused, because I don't think they make sense as standard equipment for mercs.

 

We could have them in the campaign as a rare collectors item from some rich noble who could effort to waste his money for his fancy collections.

[oDDity]

THat's what I said fromt he start.

Only elite mercs have them, and since they've been looting them from battle, not all of them have one, since not all of them have been in the same battles with the same enemies.

Say, 50% of mercs have one. Since the elites will be quite rare and not on every map, that makes ther guns rare also.

[oDDity]

Deleted by me.

See This thread

Edited April 21, 2005 by oDDity

[Domarius]

I agree but you should start a new thread with that so we can discuss it and document it properlly. This thread already has too many friggin ideas in it.

[SneaksieDave]

Having stupidly kicked the hornet's nest in the first place,

 

I "don't like the idea of it."

[Springheel]

The actual reason you don't want guns of any description, is that you don't want any on principal, you just don't 'like the idea of them', so just say that instead of making up those silly nonsense random sentences.

 

And your argument basically comes down to "I like the idea of them" and you want to piss off hardcore thief fans. I don't think you have any moral or logical high ground here.

[oDDity]

...and I want to differeniate our game from Thief, and I want the mercs to stand out as special, and I want some AI to have a one shot kill, and I want to rebel against the idea that putting a gun in the game, even an historically appropriate one, is somehow sacreligious - I thnk I've mentioned how much I despise traditon and dogma- and finally they'd be some cool moments arising form them, I'm sure.

That's a pretty stong case, sonsidering no one can come up with a single decent, coherent, logical reason for NOT having them - at least one that I can't brush of like so much dandruff.

[Macsen]

That's a pretty stong case, sonsidering no one can come up with a single decent, coherent, logical reason for NOT having them - at least one that I can't brush of like so much dandruff.

Once again I remind you that we're making this game for a fan community, who aren't going to accept guns just because they can't properly put into words exactly why they find the idea of them unappealing in this world. You won't be able to debate it with them, they just won't like it and switch off. Guns just aren't interesting in the same way steampunk creations and ancient medieval religious orders are. They're too much a part of our world, and rather boring because of it.

[oDDity]

FM authors do not have to use them. Many open minded, norma;l Thief fans will not find the idea of these historcally appropriate muskets appaling, only some of the sad, obsessive fanatics, and I think we're doing them a favour by not encouraging their deluded fantasies.

[Fingernail]

Look, there's not really any debate here as far as I'm concerned:

 

- it's not a first or even second milestone feature

- it would be optional for FM authors

- probably easier to implement than bows anyhow

- can be left until later, would not really require many code features to be inbuilt that don't already exist in D3

- we'll let FM authors and players debate the fittingness into the universe...

- not necessary or specified for the campaign, but we could use it, that's another debate IMO, for the campaign forum.

 

Since it's not a huge or urgent thing, I don't see why people are so hung up on the pros and cons. Some people think it would be good; they can later on (after release, or when they've run out of more important things to do), add it in as an optional weapon for guards, even the player, and go from there. Some people think it would be bad; but since we're not going to suddenly change the character of the mod by this or indeed implement it in milestone 1 or 2 or even 3 in all probability, and since it is ultimately the decision of the FM author (we're just giving them more CHOICE in the creation of their own environment), there's no need to worry about US looking inconsistent or untrue to the paradigm set by Thief.

[oDDity]

Give us a break - we have to argue over SOMETHING for fuck's sake. What else do you suggest?

[Fingernail]

erm....start a relgious/ethical/moral debate in Off Topic if you want.

 

Euthanasia's always a good laugh.

[Macsen]

Euthanasia's always a good laugh.

Yes, I think we should put oDDity out of his misery.

[Darkness_Falls]

When talking about the Thief world where several of us don't necessarily want to deviate from what we've accepted as "the thief world," I can brush your arguments off as dandruff, as well. Logic doesn't win over arguments regarding Thief when we're talking about a 'feeling' we get from Thief. We've accepted thief for what it is. Deviating too far from that recipe -- especially when talking about introducing gun carrying NCPs -- just doesn't feel right to me. So what if we can't explain it "logically."

 

In response to your logic: there are other ways of of making the mercs stand out as special; other ways to have a one shot kill; other ways to rebel by not deviating so much from what's generally accepted as 'thief'; other ways to create cool moments. And your despisement of tradition and dogma doesn't do much for convincing me to allow guns.

 

I know how you feel, though. Breaking through the binds of the LGS Thief oppression is not an easy task here. And often for good reason. But good luck!

[oDDity]

erm....start a relgious/ethical/moral debate in Off Topic if you want.

Now that's an excellent idea. I have some very intransigent and biggoted opinions on that.

First class famewar ending with locked thread and some permenant member bans absolutely guaranteed.