I was reading up on some archery websites about compound bows and how they explode if you shoot them without an arrow, and I came across some Quora discussions of guns v. bows.
Most of the people there agreed that guns are far more practical on every level, but one of the funniest comments was that bows are easier to make than guns!
Of course you need a machine shop to make a gun, but in the modern economy this is far cheaper than cutting down four different types of trees and spending years honing your craft as a bowyer and fletcher, lol. All you need to do to make a basically functional gun is to know how to follow directions and have a lathe and a few other things. Making a functional bow, on the otherhand, is a real MF and actually more expensive than making or buying a pistol. Compound bows can be hundreds and thousands of dollars, which is enough to get you what is effectively a sniper rifle.
The one thing bows do have on guns is that they're quieter, but you also have to be MUCH closer to your target. And, for most purposes, a gun being loud is not relevant. Stealth kills are more easily pulled off by having a huge rifle and hiding a mile away, than having a quiet weapon and being ten yards away.
I remember when I was in high school a lot of the metalhead nerds would say stuff like "guns are for pu$$ies!" and talk about their (non-functional Excalibur giftshop) sword collections.
It's funny reading Normie discussions on this stuff, I wonder where they get these ideas sometimes. TV, probably.
A bit melodramatic, but all sources agree that this did happen.
Mad Jack Churchill also stormed the beach at Normandy with a broadsword in hand.
https://www.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/mad-jack-churchill.html/2
Quote from: besilarius on October 26, 2017, 05:33:40 PM
A bit melodramatic, but all sources agree that this did happen.
Mad Jack Churchill also stormed the beach at Normandy with a broadsword in hand.
https://www.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/mad-jack-churchill.html/2
A broadsword is a Hell of a lot more practical than a bow! Even in D&D, where there are no guns, using bows is ridiculous - a single man with a bow would be lucky to get off a few shots before he got run up on and raped by a guy with a sword. Especially if said guy was also wearing decent body armor.
Carrying a broadsword is probably excessive, but melee weapons can still be useful in close-quarters combat, whereas a bow is basically just the world's shittiest and most difficult to use gun.
Quote from: Cheimison on November 01, 2017, 02:32:31 AM
A broadsword is a Hell of a lot more practical than a bow! Even in D&D, where there are no guns, using bows is ridiculous - a single man with a bow would be lucky to get off a few shots before he got run up on and raped by a guy with a sword. Especially if said guy was also wearing decent body armor.
Carrying a broadsword is probably excessive, but melee weapons can still be useful in close-quarters combat, whereas a bow is basically just the world's shittiest and most difficult to use gun.
Just so I understand your position - you're arguing that D&D lacks realism?
5e sure does.