: Given the incredible amount of carnage Dwarven technology
: already produces--is a gun more devastating than a
: mortar?--I suspect that Albrecht wasn't being entirely
: truthful. :-) The real reason is probably that Dwarves
: themselves wouldn't be very good with guns, due to
: their poor eyesight; so making lots of guns would just
: raise the combat power of every other race, making
: Dwarves weaker by comparison. This frequently happens
: with Dwarven tech, according to GURPS, especially with
: long-range weapons. Look at cannons: Dwarves made
: them, but they can't use them because of their
: eyesight. So who *does* use them? The Ghôls, the
: Dwarves' greatest enemies. Now can you imagine what
: Ghôls could do if they carried guns? :-)
But look at it this way. Most early firearms were short range anyway. Late 18th century muskets could only kill a man standing about fifty to onehundred yards away. With the armor pircing power of, lets say, a shotgun annalog the dwarves could nullify large masses of armored troops attacking a strong point.
I think they may be holding back because if humans got the basic idea of how to make such weapons they might be able to improve the range, making the dwarven gear ineffective. Think of the differnce between an 1768 model english musket and an 1860 model enfield rifle.
: Albrecht doesn't want guns produced because they wouldn't
: empower the Dwarven army, and very possibly would
: empower Ghôls and other Dwarven enemies. So he bans
: their production, and throws out that
: not-very-convincing line of "Oh, they're much too
: nasty to use in war." Horse apples.
I dont know how a being with a six foot reach could operate a dwarven musket effectively;) But horse apples is right.
: --SiliconDream
Drunken Ghol
