why guns in such an epic time

[Kveldulf]

I understand the hesitation - regarding firearms in a fantasy setting. Usually, the iconic fantasy theme omits this technology; developers/writers choosing to maintain a safe, "non-contradictory paradigm". However, like what another forum poster said, Warhammer Fantasy has firearms incorporated into its mythos (The Warhammer realm of The Empire being loosely based on the Germanic late renaissance period): it adds more distinction to its human races and doesn't break the fantasy mood.

 

If it still seems awry, then consider the history of arms and armour - a great source of justification: military armour and firearms have had quite a long history - which most Americans perceive inaccurately. A variety of harnesses (suits of armour) produced during the 16th and 17th century were made in a similar approach to contemporary body armour: negating types of threats, though, perhaps with caveats at times. For example, producing a harness that could defeat a pistol shot (Google armour of proof) may not hold up to a pike as well.

 

Also, another little known fact: the degradation of military armour design during these centuries became less innovative, and more simplistic (not in a good way) - both in form and function. An emphasis on firearms was the call empires exercised at this time; human life (-armour/protect) wasn't as important as the number of boots on the ground - inflating army numbers substantially by reducing armor production.

 

Aside from a historical consideration, much of the high adventure feeling in fantasy originates from historical bastaridizations (widely understood of course), including LOTR. The misguided adherence of the LOTR paradigm has carved a notch in customer/audience expectations: a template that is no longer about creative license to game developers but rather statistical legalism. There will always be the crowd that likes this homogeny, thinking it’s the way. From my prerogative though, games that had real essence was from an unrestraint, dare I say reckless approach, to making the game and letting the audience decide with their wallets.... and it helped the developers were gifted instead of mimics.

[PrimeJunta]

Yeah Colonial Era is a rather long, and blurry period that, as Elerond pointed out could be said to still be going but... Ehh whatever. Like I said when you say 'Colonial' I think 1700's roughly. I don't think of the 'very' start of it when it blurred with the middle ages. Also I've never heard anyone call that time period the Imperial Ages. Generally when you talk about 'imperial' its rome or greece ancient times.

 

Age of imperialism.

 

Your understanding of the word 'colonial era' is not in line with the normal usage of the word.

 

Or, put more bluntly, you don't know what the term means.

 

Put even more bluntly, you're wrong.

[Reever]

I think it makes the game more interesting. And the premise and essence of the game is quite different from run-of-the-mill fantasy games anyway, so why not?

[Adhin]

@PrimeJunta: If you say so, but the era goes on up to the 19th century, at least. It's been stated before already. And 'Colonial America' is the 1700's. Like I said its where I was born, it's what I learned growing up and its the part of that period I think of when someone says Colonial. It's PART of that Era, so technically im not wrong. It's just a portion of that 'era' not the full thing, but it is the one I think of. Maybe it's not the part you think of as you seem to only think of the 1500-1600s. And hey that's ok.

 

You wanna go ahead and think im wrong for thinking of that part of history as what that word brings up? Go for it, but your wrong about me being wrong. Opinions amirite?

[PrimeJunta]

@Adhin, the world is bigger than the U S of A. Just so you know.

[Adhin]

You know I don't know why your so damn hostile to what I've been saying. All I've tried to do is point out what I think of when people mention the Colonial Era which just happens to be British/french attire during that era. Yeah world is a lot bigger then that but the colonization of north america was a pretty damn big and important portion of that era. I'd say im sorry for that opinion and that its what I think of but im not. I'm just disappointed its caused a stupid argument over nothing. So that'll be the last I say on that.

 

Still curious if anyone will be waring those crazy wigs. Kinda split on that one, part of me hopes someone is just because I think there so stupid... and by the same token I hope I don't have to look at them cause I think there so... stupid. Guess im happy and disappointed either way.

[PrimeJunta]

If I mentioned the Great War, and you said "Yah, Hitler was a real b@stard," and I pointed out that "the Great War" means World War I, not World War II, and you rambled on about how that phrase makes you think of World War II, I would get a little irritated too. It sounds like you're proud of your ignorance, which is not a trait I find admirable.

 

Definitions are arbitrary, but some of them have fairly well-established meanings. Sometimes the meaning shifts based on context, but those shifts are well-established too. "The colonial period/era/age" means one thing in the specific context of North American history (the period starting from the voyage of the Mayflower in 1620 to the American Revolution). In the context of American history -- not just North American -- the period starts with Columbus's slaving expedition to Hispaniola in 1492 (or, sometimes, a few decades later, ca 1520, with the collapse of the Meso- and South American empires before the Conquistadores). So your insistence that "the colonial period" is the 1700's is off by about 100 years even in the North American context, and off by 200 years or so in the American context in general.

 

As to the colonization of North America, it was only important on the global scale because of what it led to 300 years later. I.e., it was important in hindsight, in the same sense that the Roman victory over the Etruscans was important. At the time it was a very minor sideshow. The real action was in India, Indonesia (spices) and South America (silver and gold). It's certainly not important in any way if you're not specifically interested in North American history.

 

And, in case you didn't notice, PoE is not a game set in North America.

 

If the context is world history, as it clearly is here since we're discussing level of technology and a broad variety of cultures, it means the period between the European voyages of discovery (Magellan, da Gama, Columbus etc.), and the eclipse of the Spanish and Portuguese empires by the French and British ones. 

 

Why "hostile?" Tough one. There's something about insistent provincialism and proud ignorance that rubs me up the wrong way. If someone knowingly uses terms wrong, which just spreads more ignorance. That's why.

[teknoman2]

the problem here is not when was the colonial era in our world. the game is set in a colonial era, so it is not medieval fantasy. that means early guns go along with swords, halberds, bows and so on. just as arcanum was set in an early industrial era so it had trains, guns, planes and such.

so the point is not when exactly that era was in our world but what it stood for in terms of culture and progress

[Kveldulf]

the problem here is not when was the colonial era in our world. the game is set in a colonial era, so it is not medieval fantasy. that means early guns go along with swords, halberds, bows and so on. just as arcanum was set in an early industrial era so it had trains, guns, planes and such.

so the point is not when exactly that era was in our world but what it stood for in terms of culture and progress

 

^ This

[Bryy]

Simple.

 

There's more to story than tradition.

[teknoman2]

The game is not set in any real life era. I really dislike such claims to either fantasy games or books as much as people claiming their ignorance is an opinion. The game world unless there are real life places, events, characters is not set in real world era it has its own era, and that era contains guns. Why? Because guns are cool.

of course it has nothing to do with our  world, it is a reference to the level of social and technological progress of that world in comparison to our own

i could say that in a fictional world's calendar, the date is Thirster 22 1760 A.C. does that mean something to you unless i give a proper explanation of it's meaning, using our world as reference? 

[PrimeJunta]

The game is not set in any real life era. I really dislike such claims to either fantasy games or books as much as people claiming their ignorance is an opinion. The game world unless there are real life places, events, characters is not set in real world era it has its own era, and that era contains guns. Why? Because guns are cool.

 

The devs have repeatedly described the world of PoE as "colonial or renaissance era, minus the printing press." I would suggest you take your objections to them.

[Katzengott]

I really like the idea of guns and, depending on location, a somewhat colonial feel in that setting. It was a brave decision to include firearms and I really hope it's balanced without turning the boomstick into "just another ranged weapon". It should be a feared but difficult to handle and expensive weapon.  

[milczyciel]

The game is not set in any real life era. I really dislike such claims to either fantasy games or books as much as people claiming their ignorance is an opinion. The game world unless there are real life places, events, characters is not set in real world era it has its own era, and that era contains guns. Why? Because guns are cool.

Heh, I sense Sapkowski's influence here

 

But I concur - the creator should be bound only by his/hers imagination, and not by some similarities expectations of it's audience. Maybe in terms of PoE, which was advertised heavy as something inspired by IE games (and thus expectations inducing) this may sound stupid or out of place. But then again, how can we predict the scale of analogy they had in their minds, while they were describing it as "colonial or renaissance era, minus the printing press"?

For all I know, people behind PoE lore are Americans and can feel more like Adhin than PrimeJunta about that whole colonialism concept.

 

But lets head back to the point - why would they have to be bound by our perceiving, if the setting in question is not even alternate reality, but a pure fantasy original IP? They don't even need to give us substitute for printing press (without which I have a hard time imagining our renaissance developing further) if they desire so.

Funny enough, I'm one of those who likes backstories and well thought reasons for things to happen, because it makes things more believable and greatly improves my suspension of disbelief -but again- does it mean that only analogies to our established knowledge could achieve that? I'm no writer, not even an educated man so I may be terribly wrong, but I strongly believe that it's not the case if we are discussing foundations for a fantasy setting.

 

Just think how illogical and different are two of my beloved game worlds - Fallout and Arcanum. First with it's vacuum tubes and huge magnetic tape reels sentient computers, and second with its steam powered airplanes manned by Ogres (the least logical choice in terms of physics) among many other examples. Both didn't provide me with more beyond "it's different" explanation, but then I didn't needed it to be historically accurate or AC Clark hard sci-fi because that was not the premise. And basically that's why I find it much easier to just forget about any reality driven rules and go with "they do not apply" as long, as the writer himself doesn't try to hard to impose different mindset upon me.

 

Oh, and given above Fallout and Arcanum examples I'm glad that devs don't have to stick to the encyclopedically correct definitions and cultural orientation we're maimed by.

Edited December 27, 2013 by milczyciel

[PrimeJunta]

Oh please. They've made it abundantly clear what they mean by the period, and it's definitely not 18th century America.

 

Both Arcanum's and Fallout's tech levels are easy to describe in terms of eras in a single phrase. Arcanum is "swords and sorcery world undergoing the Industrial Revolution," whereas Fallout is "1950's retro-futuristic mixed with modern gun nuttery."

 

Good settings are internally consistent. The logic they follow may not be entirely real-world logic, various laws of physics can be suspended as needed, and new magical metaphysics can be introduced. Even so, even fictional technologies, to be believable, should follow their own logic. Both Arcanum's and Fallout's do.

 

Fallout's tech did not appear from nowhere; we get to interact quite closely with the ruins of the corporations and national research institutes that developed them, and even get an idea of the kind of scientific and technological breakthroughs that made them happen. The fact that it's not hard sci-fi (i.e., the physics doesn't hold up) is immaterial. Likewise for Arcanum. We actually get to meet some of the most important inventors of the age; the James Watts and Thomas Edisons.

 

I don't see it as a problem that PoE's world doesn't have a printing press. I would see it as problematic if, say, there was no explanation for gunpowder. I kinda doubt that's gonna happen, as we already know something about the history of metallurgy in PoE's world -- animancy, the discovery of skein steel, the lost lore of ... what was it again, that one dwarven forge that produced its brand of uniquely good steel, and so on. It seems to be an extremely dynamic era, with new discoveries being made frequently. I like that.

 

I agree that we shouldn't get too hung up on the "Renaissance era" thing, but I think such phrases are useful to describe the overall flavor of the world.

[teknoman2]

analogies connect known facts with fictionals to make understanding easier. it is not necessary to make the fiction similar to reality, but explaining that the fictional *this* is like the real *that* is needed to make you understand what the writer means

[milczyciel]

analogies connect known facts with fictionals to make understanding easier. it is not necessary to make the fiction similar to reality, but explaining that the fictional *this* is like the real *that* is needed to make you understand what the writer means

But of course they do! You don't think I was hoping for complete out of touch approach? Because that would mean I'm ok with (for the sake of example) NPCs suddenly turning to Mandarin Chinese because "that's how they roll here"

 

I merely ask for -as PrimeJunta said- "not to hung up to" urgent need of similarity to much*

Because -again just like he said- both those game worlds I used as examples are coherent within their boundaries and because of that their inconsistency with newtonian laws or darwinian survival of the fittest are that much easier to accept.

Could be that I didn't explained it clearly enough - if such was the case, then I'm sorry

 

And to address the lack of printing press: I have an issue (but merely an issue, not a full fledged problem) with imagining renaissance without it, because of it's impact on the education progress and thus development of science and technology. But -again- by all means that doesn't need to be the same setting Josh is imagining <link>

 

 

* on a side note: like some publisher did to Andrzej Sapkowski ("The Witcher" just in case), when changing some words in "The Road with No Return" novella, to make them more suitable for medieval-like setting,  without even consulting it with him

[PrimeJunta]

Gunpowder, steel -- including relatively high-grade crucible steel -- and long-distance navigation were all invented before the printing press.

[Abel]

 

Yeah Colonial Era is a rather long, and blurry period that, as Elerond pointed out could be said to still be going but... Ehh whatever. Like I said when you say 'Colonial' I think 1700's roughly. I don't think of the 'very' start of it when it blurred with the middle ages. Also I've never heard anyone call that time period the Imperial Ages. Generally when you talk about 'imperial' its rome or greece ancient times.

 

Age of imperialism.

 

Your understanding of the word 'colonial era' is not in line with the normal usage of the word.

 

Or, put more bluntly, you don't know what the term means.

 

Put even more bluntly, you're wrong.

 

 

 

To me it seems history is not learnt the same way in every countries (never heard the word "Imperial Era" related to France or colonies histories... Or just related to the 1st and 2nd Empires (1804-1815 and 1852-1870)... I was surprised too to read that France (my country) still has colonies, when while it's true that france still has many islands, Cayenne in South America and so on, these territories are treated like "DOM TOM" which could be traduced as "extra metropolitan regions". People here are just french like any other ones (same rights and duties), and unlike in the old colonies.

 

Strange to me too to read that colonisation started in the 1500'. Well i learnt it was before. Because of the european worldwide trading companies and their worldwide little trading colonies... Colomb went to America because, as for Vasco de Gama, they looked for new trading routes to Asia. America was just an accident on the way. Colonisation has not started with America, even if the Colomb's discovery contributed to shift the expansion. But it's true that speaking of America as THE important place in colonisation history is pointless here, because colonisation started long before and lasted long after. Asia started being colonised before, Africa after... America was no more than just one more piece of earth in the european's silly rivalry game back then. Well, a "new", "exotic" one, with just few million inhabitants, but just one more detail, and only south america seemed to be rich enough compared to trading opportunities in Asia.

 

At least, it's the way i was teached history. A different way, and that's my point here.

 

But no matter, as (like some said) PoE is "not" reality, but an "alternative" reality. Arcanum was great with its technology/magic feature, and i think PoE will add firearms in a nice way too. I don't think there is much to worry about, nor Obsidian added them just to make some fancy stuff. Troika is here and i feel many people will judge firearms in PoE well in place and lore friendly after release. It's hard to judge a feature on its own, without looking at the whole thing. Just having to be patient and open minded enough to not miss something that may be cool just "because". Still, i can understand the worrying of people who disliked firearms in Arcanum, but remember that firearms in PoE won't be a leading concept of the game, just one more detail in the lore.

 

(PS: *seeing the video "the 3 musketeers".... *sigh*. Can't help it*)

(EDIT: Thx PrimeJunta, i learnt some history details)

Edited December 28, 2013 by Abel

[nikolokolus]

I'm upset about the wheel lock pistols and guns too ... I was really hoping they'd go for something a little more "immersive" like ancient Hyperborean laser pistols.

 

#clarkashtonsmithforthewin, #iffantantasyisworthdoingitsworthdoingitweird

[PrimeJunta]

The French differed from the British in the way they approached their colonies. The Brits went for classic divide-and-conquer subjugation, co-opting the native elites but never intending to give the masses any more rights than they had to, whereas the French wanted to turn their colonies French. The French modeled their empire on Romanization -- they way the Roman empire absorbed and acculturated all of its conquests. I remember reading a memoir by a Senegalais who went to one of the new schools the French built there, reading a history book starting with "Nos pères les Gaulois..."

 

This is why the remnants of the French empire were absorbed into the French polity. That difference in administrative status doesn't change the reality of the DOM-TOM any, though. They're still imperial remnants.

 

History is mostly taught really badly at schools. It's a tool of indoctrination; of getting kids to believe that their country, of all countries, has the most righteous, just, and glorious history. About justifying the atrocities committed in your country's name, and nurturing grievances about wrongs perpetrated against it. Building actual understanding about the past is rarely a high priority. I've checked out a bunch of schoolbooks about history from a variety of countries -- including my own -- and they're all bad. You especially shouldn't trust what they say about your own country, or countries with which your country has been at war. Which, for countries with imnperial histories, means just about everyone, sadly.

 

I think it's a bit facetious to say that the age of colonialism or the age of empires is still ongoing. Historical periodization is based on identifying a dominating factor; if we have to wait until all traces of it have disappeared, ages drag on for a really long time. There's still a Pope but that doesn't mean we're still in the Middle Ages; there are still uncontacted, isolated peoples and unexplored patches on the map here and there, but we're not in the Age of Discovery anymore, European antiquity ended more than a thousand years before the last heir of the ancient empires fell in 1453, and the empires unraveled after World War 2. 

 

</end tangent>

[Walsingham]

People don't understand the purpose of school, IMO. It's not to teach you the truth. I don't know how the **** they'd do that, anyway. It's to teach you how to think; build up the mental muscles by obliging you to learn and manipulate different data types. 

 

By analogy, you might as well criticise circuit training because none of the actions undertaken are ones you would ever do in normal life.

 

The relevance to the topic is that these weapon types fulfill a functional role. Their 'true' factual status and consistency is moot.

[Kveldulf]

People don't understand the purpose of school, IMO. It's not to teach you the truth. I don't know how the **** they'd do that, anyway. It's to teach you how to think; build up the mental muscles by obliging you to learn and manipulate different data types. 

 

By analogy, you might as well criticise circuit training because none of the actions undertaken are ones you would ever do in normal life.

 

The relevance to the topic is that these weapon types fulfill a functional role. Their 'true' factual status and consistency is moot.

 

"I've never let my school interfere with my education." - Mark Twain

 

Though I also have to quote Noah Webster - "Education is useless without the Bible".

 

If you are being taught how to think, without truth, it's a scary propisition; a deficit of authenticity.

Edited December 28, 2013 by Kveldulf

[PrimeJunta]

People don't understand the purpose of school, IMO. It's not to teach you the truth. I don't know how the **** they'd do that, anyway. It's to teach you how to think; build up the mental muscles by obliging you to learn and manipulate different data types.

In a perfect world, maybe. With some really good teachers, certainly. In the world we live in, though, the purpose of school is indoctrination: to turn kids into good obedient little citizens consumers. In particular, with regards to teaching history, to turn them into good obedient patriotic unthinking cannon fodder laborers.

Edited December 28, 2013 by PrimeJunta

[PrimeJunta]

If you are being taught how to think, without truth, it's a scary propisition; a deficit of authenticity.

Truth is a highly problematic proposition. If you believe there is such a thing in a final, absolute sense, you're already mistaken. It's worse if you get that at school.