Hi /tg/ I need some help with the world setting for my D&D sesssion. The weapon technology in my fictional world is early 18th century but I'm trying to come up with any reason for such advanced weapons in a world with architecture and culture reminiscent of the 11th century. If you can come up with possible back stories like religion, invention, discovery or anything else it would be appreciated.
>>46293086
OP here if you could possibly come up with a way to make swords deemed obsolete, immoral, illegal that would be really interesting.
>>46293086
What you have to keep in mind is that before standardisation in more modern times, technology was all over the place and only barely somewhat to the general education and materials available in the industry at the time. The actual basics of the flintlock (for example) aren't particularly advanced and would've required very basic engineering capabilities at best, alongside a good source of ignition powder if the weapon was to be used outside somebody's personalised inventions.
While I'm no socio-political historian and can't really think of good ways to have such a disparity, it's not as terrible as you might think to have later engineering capabilities in settings analogous to earlier periods.
That being said, flintlocks themselves would be far harder to excuse than the earlier matchlock designs.
>>46293086
>with architecture and culture reminiscent of the 11th century.
There's plenty of architecture inspired by rennaisance and antique examples in Washington, so the question is kinda silly as the answer is "politics".
Another answer is: "they import their guns". It's what Africa did, which is how you get antique, roman-style ancestor worshipping slave-empires using flintlock guns.
Some kind of fallen ancient society whose scientific techniques have been lost to the ages
>"the cities of our forefathers, designed by the engineers of their time, still stand as a proud testament to the strength of our lineage"
>>46293549
OP here Sorry I should have made it clear that this is entirely fictional but I'm taking inspiration from various elements of history. essentially I need a reason for flintlock weapons to be the only ones available and have a reason for melee weapons to be illegal, dishonourable, ect
>>46293647
OP here. I'm liking this premise.
>>46293855
Also,
>"swords and other such brutal implements of suffering have been both outlawed and rendered useless in light of the recent rediscovery of firearm technology, the humane and civilized weapons employed by our ancestors"
>>46293812
P...politics?
Basically total weapon ban safe for a certain class and those are supplied with guns or gun parts by the Emperor from his centralized trade contracts?
It really doesn't make sense to limit folks to flintlock guns alone though, because we used swords, maces and bayonets the size of shortswords right up and through WW1, so folks in your setting would probably at very least have honour guards who used gun/sword combinations or bayonets on both guns and pistols... it's super magical realm though.
>>46293925
Thanks anon can I ask where you are getting the quotes? this information is really helping to build justification of the civilizations politics
>>46293938
>"doesn't make sense to limit folks to flintlock guns alone though"
I know it seems odd. I'm just trying to justify a reason for only using projectile weapons like>>46293925
>>46293960
I wrote them as I was responding, off the cuff.
>>46294133
Op here good job. I have some great ideas sometimes, but when you just can't come up with anything you look else where for inspiration. Thanks anon keep it coming.
>>46294210
Thanks, but that's all I got. Good luck with the campaign.
OP here I'm open to suggestions of mythical creatures. I was thinking of including dragons but that seems too close to traditional fantasy.
>>46293086
You have to keep in mind that while technology impacted how things like clothes and housing ended up looking, it wasn't the only factor. Tons of it is basically just regional fashion, and that goes for anything from weapons to houses or hats.
If you WANT stuff to look like the 11th century but have 18th century technology, there's no reason why it can't, it'll just have better communication and advanced craftsmanship.
>>46293142
>>46293812
Historically the church BANNED a lot of weapons for use against other christians and threatened with excommunication, but nobody ever gave half a shit if the weapons were still relevant and useful.
People choosing an inferior option or limiting themselves because of culture is very unrealistic, nobody cares more about making the church or the king happy than about staying alive, so if there are still reasons to use swords, people are going to use swords, unless you have some god that literally makes you explode if you pick up sharp implements or something.
>>46293812
Religion is always a good option for setting up weird scenarios like that.
Suppose that the religion of the land considers human blood to be unclean the way Islam views pigs to be unclean, only with a far more intense loathing. No believer would only ever willingly fight in hand-to-hand combat, and so possession of melee weapons is seen as a mark of impiety or barbarism. Alternately, the religion's prohibition on killing could have been phrased as "thou shalt not bloody thy hands" or something similar, so that a literalistic interpretation means killing someone cleanly from afar is permissible, while a melee kill is sinful.
Or if you want to avoid having a not!Abrahamic faith, you could have the people worship a deity with a hunter/huntress motif like Artemis, or have the Hercules-equivalent great warrior figure of their mythology be an archer, so that ranged weapons are seen as holy in the way that the cruciform sword was to crusaders.
>>46293086
The technology was imported. The Chinese invented gunpowder way ahead of the rest of the world, and in the same fashion Westerners brought firearms to Japan way ahead of them inventing any such on their own. You could follow a similar pattern and have them be imported from a foreign civilisation (which doesn't need to be extremely advanced, perhaps firearms are their only major technological breakthrough but that is up to you).
>>46293142
I really don't know of a decent reason why people wouldn't use swords when the only alternative is kind of shitty firearms, but here's the following idea:
- The ore used for smithing contains significant amounts of poisonous elements, such as mercury, arsenic, magical crystals, whatever, I'm bad at chemistry. No method of purification has been found thus far.
The catch is that sword wounds are extremely hard to heal and recover from and have a very high lethality rate.
Bullets on the other hand, can be made of polished stone or crystal, rather than metal, and while they hurt just as bad as getting shot would, they are more 'humane' than the almost-certain-death swords.
>>46294507
Except unless the gods literally show up in person to set you on fire, nobody cares about the religious reasons when push comes to shove.
The crossbow replaced the warbow despite the church decreeing that using it could lead to excommunication and damnation of the soul.
Arbitrary rules generally don't discourage people from anything that can give them an advantage, so it's often a very sketchy thing to rely on in worldbuilding.
People should use guns because they're better than swords, that's enough reasons, but people won't hesitate to pick up swords if gunpowder is rare, super expensive, unpredictable or battles generally devolve into close quarters anyway.
You know what happens otherwise? The people who didn't bring swords get butchered in night attacks, the rain or any situation where the flintlocks don't really do much.
>>46294586
What are you making the gun out of if the ore is unsafe enough that people wouldn't use it for swords or armour?
How is the poison still active after heating the metal to the smelting point?
Even if you just randomly decide that iron ore is always, always found in deposits together with harmful elements, stuff like bog-iron is still going to be just iron oxides and that was an important source of metal for primitive smiths.
In general, convoluted explanations end up making the setting dumber than just handwaving it would have.
>>46294469
If there's magic, he could always note that gunpowder weapons weren't used widely in military beacause mages can cast shield or somesuch, rendering volleys useless. Or some shadowy cabal might be ensuring that any lasting designs and pushes towards utilizing anything more advanced is rendered null, all in service of keeping that stasis where magic rules going.
>>46294507
>Suppose that the religion of the land considers human blood to be unclean the way Islam views pigs to be unclean, only with a far more intense loathing.
The Japanese did and the Chinese did as well. It just means that they develope rites of purification and social castes that claim immunity to it.
>>46293086
Make flying enemies regular and actually make melee weapons obsolete
>>46293086
The Chinese first invented gunpower in the 9th Century. However they lacked the easily exploitable iron and lead reserves Yurope had in order to properly put that invention to use. If you had a nation with both a burgeoning fascination with Alchemy and easily accessible iron, you could conceivably have flintlocks much earlier.
>>46294276
If you want to add a dragon then just add a dragon. Your setting isn't too cool or snowflake that it can't benefit from a proper dragon.
>>46293812
could be that all weapons were outlawed for some reason, but then flintlocks got invented and either took advantage of a loophole or otherwise didn't fit the current definition of 'weapon'. the law hasn't yet been revised due to sluggish politics, and now people are freely buying and brandishing guns and kitchen knives, but nothing in between.
>>46293938
>magical realm
Most of the rest of the world imports the guns. From who? Dwarves. Dwarves make guns. Now you probably have to do some more world building specifically for dwarves in order to reflect how and why they're more technologically advanced, but it's a decent start and has some potential. Maybe there's a masturbatory gun culture in dwarven countries just like there is in the United States.
>>46293086
>>46293142
Religion. The fantasy Pope outlawed swords, trying to end all war. People just laughed at him and invented guns to get around losing their immortal souls for "doing bodily harm to another man with any blade or spear or cudgel"
>>46293142
>>46293086
A fucking Dragon comes around a D destroys civilization every once in a while, and he specifically targets those using swords and spears and shit as potential heroes who can finally defeat him, and disregards firearms as churlish toys because he is old and bitter.
>>46303023
We have long known that Dwarves are worshipers of the /k/ube.
>>46294586
>I really don't know of a decent reason why people wouldn't use swords when the only alternative is kind of shitty firearms.
Geology and geography. Remember that the american indians were using stone axes, spears, bows and rifles. Why? They didn't have iron ore just laying around and had no tradition in metallurgy. All their guns they got from foreigners, they never learnt to make them themselves or had the resources to do so. Ditto for the south americans as well.
>>46294276
>"Oh fuck Bill there's a dragon now"
>"Shut the fuck up Jim I need the gold on that train"
>"Oh it's always you isn't it? Fuck you Bill, it's always about you"
