Please try not to single members out. I wouldn't like being singled out, you probably wouldn't, and I'm sure Qawsed doesn't like it. Not trying to backseat moderate, just influence some common courtesy.

Anyhoo, my personal opinion is no. IMO, I just can't see how guns would fit into lore or the TES universe.

Oh believe me, I do not take any order from anyone, cept those in the mod and admin department, hence why I did not even repeat ya saying.

Good times.

So, the fight ends and we live happily ever after? Fine by me, who wants to go fallout bashing

Just like civilization. The conditions were there for 1500 years before we finally developed civilization.

And we all live happily ever after...Until the next thread. :facepalm:


:P

lol, true so very true

Pshh. Ceasing to continue discussion now that it is upon us is for the weak. What would Shor say?


Then I guess the odds of such an invention occurring now are pretty slim, aren't they? As I said in my previous posts, the eras before the current time were veritable gold mines for supposed gun-development. So if they didn't happen then, why should they happen now when magic is far more accessible and the "need" for invention has waned to almost nothingness? A rhetorical question really, as it's relatively easy to come up with a chain of events with equally unlikely premises to draw the conclusion of guns. "Magic-deprived Bob just discovered it one day, living in solitude in his smithy out in the middle of nowhere!" Where'd he get the idea? "Why, he just came up with it! Took a look at a crossbow, and that was that!" How'd he figure out a firing mechanism? "Oh, he just tinkered and tinkered for a while, and then one day he had it!" How'd he distill an accurate formula for a gunpowder-esque material? "Well, he had an alchemist buddy a while back who just happened to be talking about it one day!"

Looks like our friend Bob the Smith is turning into a real http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla Or a http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MartyStu Not sure which. However, there's a lot of unlikely qualities in Bob's invention of the firearm, and a lot of "The inclusion dictates the explanation," rather than the preferred "The explanation dictates the inclusion."

And that's the problem with this particular argument. Nirn's been through some intense magickal dark ages, without procuring a firearm. Could one be developed without an intense dark age? Potentially. However, in the context of a story and a history, it sticks out like a sore thumb and reeks of bad writing and inclusion-for-the-sake-of-inclusion when you say, "This group just now invented guns," despite the fact that countless centuries of more opportune times had presented themselves while bearing no fruit whatsoever.


Your right, that 75-magnitude, 50-foot radius fire-damage spell that knocks enemies off their feet isn't an explosion at all. The statement was, "Fire damage can be seen as the game-mechanic equivalent of explosive results." And if potions are unable to do enough damage to fit the bill (which is limited to Oblivion, as Morrowind's alchemy became godly at high skill levels), then enchanters can replace alchemists. As enchanters have had equally as much time to play around with fire spell effects as alchemists have with fire potion effects.

Besides, this is just an awkward game of semantics. Fire damage == Fire. And fire translates to all applications of fire, whether that be open burning flame or of compressed heat rapidly expanding in an explosive effect.


And I still see no reason to put stock in your belief that the lesser subgradients of the et'ada can outscope the Aedra, the Daedra, or those who fall under neither category *cough*Lorkhan*cough*. Unpredictable, sure. But unpredictability does not equal creativity. The Daedra love to interact with mortals because the Daedra gain definition from mortals. A Daedra whose sphere does not affect mortals is a powerless Daedra.

From the http://www.imperial-library.info/mwbooks/monomyth.shtml:

We start with the Godhead, which is to say, one whole.
We split that into IS-IS NOT, Anu and Padomay. The whole is divided.
Anu and Padomay, give birth to their souls and form Anuiel and Sithis. The whole is divided further.
Pre-convention et'Ada form out of the interplay of IS and IS NOT. The whole is split into fragments.
The convention occurs. et'Ada become Aedra and Daedra. Many Aedra die. Those that live parent other spirits and die. The mortal races are shaped and created. The fragments of the whole are further split into innumerable splinters.

Now, with that picture in mind, how can one of those innumerable splinters claim to have more prowess and potential than the fragments from whence it split?

Further:

Indicating that Mundus does not have much of the possiblity that lies outside of Mundus, with the et'Ada.

Wow, overkill, neat :clap:, well if there was ever any doubt, it sure is gone now. ThatOneGuy, your name will forever be feared by anyone who starts a topic about adding guns, have a cookie :cookie:


RIP: Gun Idea :violin:

May you never rise again :celebration:

All he's done is explain its improbability. Which is fine with me. I just don't see any reason to call it impossible.

Guns wouldnt fit because of oblivions time period...add guns and we have fable......

And because of existing lore, feel of the series, and the universe of the series. (Which is pretty much the same as lore, I just like having three things instead of two. )

:lol: Over the course of who-knows-how-many threads, you build up a lot of rehashed arguments ready to be thrown out at a moment's notice.


I would have hoped, particularly with that last segment dealing with the failure of the et'ada to create guns and mortals being less capable than et'ada (and all the ramifications that follow), that I would have indicated improbability so high as to be interchangeable with impossibility. In the same sense that flamboyantly pink elephant-sized leprechauns popping out of the ground in the Imperial Reserve (in the lore) is insanely improbable, yet still technically possible. But the odds against are so astoundingly high, most would feel comfortable putting the label of "impossibility" on it all the same.

After all, the odds are astoundingly high against my hand suddenly literally sinking into the physical substance of the keys of my keyboard. However, there is always that minuscule percentage, that chance that all the molecular compounds and atomic particles in both my hand and the keys could line up in just the perfect manner, allowing my hand to do just that: sink into another object. Yet we don't bother classifying solid objects melding together in such a manner as "improbable, but still technically possible," do we?

To quote a line from http://www.imperial-library.info/obbooks/myth_menace.shtml, "It is not possible to prove a negative." And in the scientific sense, that is true. However, we can show something to be so improbable as to be generally assumed impossible for the sake of establishing basic premises to build from.

The 75-magnitude, 50-foot radius fire-damage spell doesn't knock you back, and that was the point I was making.

And as far as the right conditions, for the development of guns, it only takes a small group of technology devoted people to sit down for a few years and come up with something like a gun. (And on a side note, Bob the Smith is awesome!)

Let's say that Gods are better than mortals, and have the idea for a gun, but never went along with it because they don't need it. If they can create such heavily enchanted primitive weapons that they do far more than a gun ever could why would they make a gun. However, since mortals are nowhere near that powerful, a gun would be a viable alternative.

With the empire in danger, and most likely wars taking place for the throne, magic may become more exclusive, and the guild may try to keep its secrets as Tamriel enters a new dark age. In this world of war and the exclusivity of magic training, a gun could emerge.

Now, I am not stupid, and fully agree that the inclusion of guns will most certainly never happen, but the OP wanted to know if they should, and while I have no opinion on whether they should or not, lore wise I have found no solid evidence, though what you provide is often touted as such, that says they cannot be melded into the series.

To be fair, I only gave your posts a browse. Now that I've fully read them, I'm going to have to disagree.

For starters, you're entire "Endall Gun Debates" post is based largely on the premise that Dwemer would have been the ones to develop gun technology, which is a fallible argument in itself. But let's skip to the pertinent section:



Right. If TESV were to take place several years ahead of TESIV, there should be no reason to expect such technology to appear, let alone be implemented in the game.



This bit is a little self-defeating in a couple ways. You state that there's no reason for gun technology because of magic. But then you state bows or crossbows are alternatives for those not skilled in magic. Let's tackle this first; if magic defeats the purpose of guns, why doesn't it defeat the purpose of either bows or crossbows? You also continue to say that there are indeed those not skilled with magic. Which itself defeats the purpose of even mentioning the fact that magic would defeat the purpose for higher technology.

Also, as much as I was criticized for calling early guns relatively simple mechanisms, why should you be given any more leniency for saying that bows or crossbows are relatively simple? The people of Nirn obviously have some ability for technological advancement right off the bat if they've developed bows and crossbows. How strange would the idea of a bow sound to someone who has never heard of one? A piece of wood with a string crossing its ends that fires stones and metal attached to other pieces of wood? In fact, the fact that the inhabitants of Nirn have already developed crossbows makes the idea of a (relatively, to us, anyway) simple gun much more plausible than a bow from not a bow.



Not everyone makes it into the Mages' Guild just because they want to. It's foolish to think that because someone has a need for more firepower that they could waltz into the Mages' Guild and be able to learn how to unleash considerable destruction.

Let's say there's a farmer. He's smart. But he isn't very fast. Now let's say there's a rogue mage problem. Someone has been stealing some of his crops, his livestock, what have you (he), and by some miracle has managed to keep himself from them. Now, he can maybe produce a small flame using magic. But he isn't able to unleash any significant destruction. He can't afford to not take care of his farm while he goes and learns more advanced magic techniques. He can't afford to pay someone to do it for him, either. So what does he do? What if he had discovered in his youth some strange incendiary power (not necessarily gunpowder), and he also knows how to use a crossbow (which presumably would do little against a band of mages because of its limited range). Right there you have the two necessary mechanisms for a simple firing device like a gun. He does a little expirementing, and voila. Now, I'm not suggesting this is how guns would or should be introduced if they are at all ever (which is admittedly doubtful), im just suggesting this to demonstrate some higher level of probability than "flamboyantly pink elephant-sized leprechauns popping out of the ground in the Imperial Reserve".

Let's go one step further. He has, even if limited, some proficiency in destruction (above, able to create a small flame). So he could actually use magic as a part of this device. Imagine if an average to moderately powerful mage could conserve their magicka by a substantial amount by only having to use a little to fire a projectile that could do as much damage as a moderate fireball spell. Hm.



Then instead of attempting to prove some deep, immovable lack of probability for such an occurence in the TES universe, just say that. Just say that it doesn't fall into the compass of what your perception of a sword-and-magic high-fantasy RPG is. Even say that it doesn't fall into the compass of what most TES fans' perception of a sword-and-magic high-fantasy RPG is (even if this would be misguided if your idea of the TES fanbase comes from this site). Even point out the fact that M'aiq the Liar mocks those that want guns in the game, and that it's high improbability of occuring comes from the fact that developers don't seem to want to implement such a feature. But don't attribute it's improbability to any lore, especially since lore doesn't really to eliminate its possibility or probability.

As far as the et'Ada, are you implying that they had a hand in the development of technologies that already exist in Nirn? Did they invent the mechanism a crossbow uses?

ORLY :shifty:

Ahem...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4lflgxSOHM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtSUJnWom54

You were saying? :toughninja:

Doesn't send people flying. That's also hardly a realistic effect for fire to have on surroundings.

My turn to bash reasons



Tsk, tsk...and i read all your posts from top to bottom :grad: shameful



Ok, seriously who do you expect to have the intelligence, the endurance, the willpower and luck to actually come close to the idea, it won't be the mages, nor the fighters, the dwemer were the only race to have any chance of even getting the idea of firearms.



Yay...more agreement, only i would probably agree to a greater extent.



Archery and crossbows, are very different from guns, guns represent a hybrid of magic and marksmanship on an industrial level, something which just isn't present in the TES universe, why ask for bread when the dough isn't there?



Nice to see we are on the same page on something



EXCUSE ME??!!! How much experience do you have with crossbows? Take a look at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0ICKG0lfZg, chubby there was able to hit a bullseye from that far in one shot, if rogue mages invaded the farm, the farmer could simply barricade himself and watch the heads fly as he fires bolt after bolt by crossbow as headshots



You know it would be much easier if you joined our side :celebrate:

PS



The fire thing is simply game mechanics, i linked to books because firstly i couldn't find anything with people (people just don't post flying NPC's anymore :shakehead:) secondly, the effect would be almost identical for people, don't believe me, take a movie of you doing a 50 radius fire spell on corpses and post it, i dare you :mohawk:

Look at my example. Rigorous research isn't the only plausible source of new developments, not by a longshot.



Yeah. Multiple times in the thread I've said it would largely be based on the length of following Eras as well was which Era TESV took place in. Assuming guns would ever be impmented.



Even though you managed to evade the critical points of what you quoted here, I'll bite. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arquebus



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arquebus



Magic, marksmanship, or industry, which is totally irrelevant?



A crossbow's falloff range is very short. After a certain distance you won't be able to fire with any amount of accuracy that you might expect from a bow, and most certainly a crossbow. In the video, not only are those modern crossbows that are quite advanced when compared to those that might exist in a "sword-and-magic high-fantasy RPG", but that is not all that far that they are firing it.



It seems to me that I've already said I don't expect to see guns, and that I also don't care either way if they do decide to, but maybe I haven't made that as clear as I could have.

Except that spells have physics enabled for them, even for the actors. Admittedly, there are some gimpy game mechanics attached to it, but I have still blasted people off their feet with a spell before (and they were still alive for a few seconds after getting blasted).


If we're going to say "Gods knew how to make guns but they didn't need them," then we might as well say, "Gods knew how to make bows, but they didn't need them." The creators, right after creation, were at bloody war with one another. The creators created weapons to aid in that war. If they could have made guns, they would have made them, because they damn-well needed as powerful weapons as they could get to fight each other. And a god-made primitive weapon would still be inferior next to a god-made gun. This is getting rather speculative at best, and grasping for straws at worst.


And if you had read further beyond that post, you would have read that the thread it was ripped from months back was heavily leaning on the Dwemer being the ones to create guns. The post fits the context for that thread.


Again, speculative. And again, I must ask, "why now?" It's been roughly 6700 years or so between the 4th era and the end of the Dawn. Why now, and not in the earlier times when such need would have been far more drastic and accented?


What you're not seeming to comprehend is my belief, with supporting evidence from lore, that the mortals of Nirn did not invent their weapons. Improved upon base concepts already present, perhaps, but not invented.

Let's start with what's already present in terms of firearms within the world: bows. Now, if we were to apply real-life weapons progression to this, we would naturally conclude that Nirn started with the most basic weapon of all, spears, realized they could be thrown, perhaps moved into throwing stones and using slings as projectors, and eventually came to the propulsion provided by a bent stick with some form of twine. We would be able to conclude that there was a time-period during Nirn where bows did not exist in the slightest.
However, unlike real life, Nirn was created by et'ada, and those et'ada then walked their creation. And when those et'ada walked creation during the Dawn, guess what one of the more famous had with them?

Once again, from the http://www.imperial-library.info/mwbooks/monomyth.shtml#Lorkhan:

Gods create world.
Gods are bound to world.
Gods fight other gods in world, and what did these gods who created the world use? A bow.
Not invented over the course of time by mortals, not brought about by progression and development. Presented from the very start in the hands of a god. Did Anu literally give Auriel (/Akatosh/Time) his bow (fairly questionable, as Anu is purportedly a force without sentience)? Or did the Aedra Auriel, who it should be noted had knowledge from before the convention, create the bow himself? It doesn't really matter either way, as either way, it came from the hands of a god.

And if gods are fighting a war, why should they just use bows? Why not axes and maces and swords and crossbows and spears and knives and throwing stars and the rest? Perhaps not all the weapons of the world were brought in by the gods in their Dawn-war, but it's more than likely a significant portion were, at the very least the base archetypes for what currently is what we see in weaponry in Nirn today. As I mentioned earlier, there have been around 6700 years between the end of the Dawn and the start of the 4th era. How is it that they've made almost no significant technological advancements since that time, regarding those weaponry? Unless, of course, such development is impossible or inhibited beyond mortal potential.

Which brings us to another facet of the et'ada debate that ObeseBoyWonder and I are currently engaged in. If gods have the power, opportunity, and prior knowledge to create whatever they will to aid in their war, then why did they not create guns? And further, since mortals are lesser subgradients of the et'ada in all ways, how can mortals be expected to create what gods did not?



EDIT: And if the situation of the et'ada wasn't enough, then let us consider the case of Mehrunes Dagon.

The esteemed Mehrunes Dagon is the Daedric Prince of Destruction, Revolution, Energy, Change,and Ambition, meaning he is literally and completely the embodiment of those concepts.
Guns are the epitome of destruction. They are designed with the sole purpose of killing, wounding, or breaking.
Guns facilitate revolution, as most weapons do. They are used by dissenters and revolutionaries to create power shifts.
Guns are powered by energy, either through chemical processes or, in TES's hypothetical case alchemical or magickal processes.
Guns represent change. They would be both a change to the status quo of magic-users and a change to the world of warfare.
Guns require and fulfill ambition. The ambitious are the only ones who could hope to make it, and the ambitious are the ones who would use it.

It would appear that guns reside well within the spheres of Mehrunes Dagon. It would appear that guns have no choice but to be relevant to Mehrunes Dagon's interests. Yet why is it, then, that the Dremora breaching the liminal barriers and pouring out into Tamriel did not carry firearms? Why is it that firearms are not present within the Deadlands? Why is it that Dagon's followers are not blessed with such destructive weapons? If firearms are metaphysically plausible within the Aurbis AT ALL, then why hasn't Mehrunes Dagon invented them yet? (And before I hear claims of, "He's not too bright," realize that Dagon is a Daedra and is far smarter and swifter than most give him credit for...) If it were plausible for them to exist in the first place, one would think they would almost materialize on the very ground Dagon walks, they are so tied to his spheres. And yet Mehrunes Dagon has no guns. And Mehrunes Dagon has had a loooooong time to contemplate the plausibility of guns.

So if the Prince of Destruction hasn't brought the world firearms, why should a mortal, in a ways lesser than a Daerda, be the one to do it?

Alright, I didn't understand that you were making this point.



Well, bows, slings, spears and even the atl-atl are all thought to have emerged at the same area of time. But given above, I understand now where you're coming from.



I'm going to be honest. This logic is a large majority of why I don't like TES lore. It is incredibly and unnecessarily restricting on what should be thought of as a persistent world. It restricts such simple things as ideas. I'm more than sure there are an abundance of uses for the resources available to the inhabitants of lore that haven't been used yet, even by the gods, so does that mean these uses just don't exist?

The only way I can answer your question is with another, because everything exists to actually create gun technology, why haven't the gods?

Because since when does someone who can turn into a DRAGON or make you go INSANE need guns..?

Why would you need more archaic weaponry?

Stylish.

Something can be said for classical things.

:D

Why haven't the gods created guns and instead chose to create what we know as traditional medieval-style weaponry? A concrete answer doesn't exist (and never will,) but we can still draw at least 2 potential guesses:
1) The gods chose traditional old-world weaponry over guns for abstract stylistic reasons. They could have done it, but chose not to.
2) The actual concept of guns is itself metaphysically implausible within the Aurbis. They couldn't do it because they were completely incapable of conceptualizing them for unknown reasons.

And either 1) or 2) closes off guns to mortals, because mortals are subgradient to gods. And if gods didn't/chose not to conceptualize them, then mortals cannot hope to do so either.

Which, ironically, brings us full circle, back to the simple statement:
"Guns do not fit the basic premises of The Elder Scrolls."
Only now, it's both a statement of personal preference and a statement of lore.

My apologies that you find TES lore unnecessarily restrictive. While it does hamper such concepts as firearms, a multitude of amazing philosophical things can be done with it, as evidenced by Michael Kirkbride's cryptoposts and obscure texts over the years. It is deep, enriching, metaphysical, and ever-convoluted. Really, it's a lot less restrictive than most make it out to be.