Quoting Joey Beutel <mejobo@comcast.net>:
Why
did renaissance and even medieval armies switch to crossbows and guns
(at least for the most part)? because it was easier to hand someone a
gun or crossbow, tell them how it worked, and send them to the front.
Well, there were other pressures for that, too. Such as having
control of the gunpowder manufacture meant that your own army would
have a rougher time turning the tables on you.
Olympic shooters
aren't really a good representation.
Perhaps not. But the data is readily available.
A good comparison would be a
native american archer's accuracy vs. that of a civil war soldier
using his service rifle. I think that rule not only balances the game
for more medieval tech users (that and that armor is more effective
against guns than it really should be, but still) but also makes some
sense realistically.
Not a good comparison, and it seems that generally, the native
american bow wasn't considered a powerful weapon at all. That may
not affect accuracy much, but does affect range and damage.
And I'm not the guy who especially wants reality in my game rules. I
do want consistency.
Neil Gilmore
raito@raito.com
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"