What guns weren't invented until the year 3000

[Central Slavia]

This actually reminds me of the DMFA comic... there it seems that although a lot of technics, especially electricity related exist, chemistry never quite took off and was supplanted by alchemy... as such folks rely on cold steel and spells... and yes, those physically strong do indeed rule

[Minoriteeburg]

I want this...

(Image)

Yeah I bet modernized heavy crossbows could quite bit of damage.

Guess I am just an old fashioned kind of guy.

[Greed and Death]

I want this...

(Image)

where is this ?

[Dakini]

The European explorers who "found" the Americas would have waited for good old fashioned disease to decimate the native population instead of helping this process along by also shooting at them.

[Brogavia]

The world would suck because guns took the power away from the landed gentry.

[The Soviet Technocracy]

You'd better bend over and grovel to those motherfuckers riding horses and in plate armour.

+1

[Greed and Death]

The European explorers who "found" the Americas would have waited for good old fashioned disease to decimate the native population instead of helping this process along by also shooting at them.

I don't know since the sick ones were slower not shooting them might have helped spread it more.

[Geniasis]

Then Lincoln, Kennedy, and John Lennon would have never been thwarted, and the Liberal hivemind would have gone online in the early 80s and not have to be delayed until 2012.

[Greed and Death]

The world would suck because guns took the power away from the landed gentry.

It would be boss if you were a landed gentry tho

But landed gentry managed to survive until 1918

Nothing like the right jus primae noctis to make a hard day of being lord better.

[Korintar]

Well, if we are talking about gunpowder...

There might still be firearms (no, I am not talking about crossbows, composite bows, trebuchets, catapults, et cetera- I'm talking rifles, pistols, muskets, and cannons), but they might not necessarily be viewed as being as practical. People would've developed firearms anyway, but they would operate using steam or airpower. The drawback of those two methods are that steam weapons are inefficient and clumsy and lack range and power the gunpowder firearms have. As for early airguns, it would've been easier from what I here to make them a multi-shot weapon and did not need dry weather to work properly (a drawback of early gunpowder weapons), however they were much more difficult to maintain and probably more expensive. There would still be research done to figure out how to construct light weight armor (like kevlar), only difference is that it would have deflect a blade instead of a bullet. Lighter, easier to wield, cheaper swords and pole arms would be developed, however they would not necessarily be the same as medieval weapons- it would be like comparing a first generation medieval hand cannon to an M 16 or a MetalStorm firearm- same basic principle but two completely different kinds of weapons.

[Obliheim]

Catapults would be considered WMDs...

And trebuchets the H bombs of the world.

Think Mangonel

[Greed and Death]

Nothing like the right jus primae noctis to make a hard day of being lord better.

It's good to be the King

Hey I had a hard day to day I had to wake up. I need to sleep with one of the peasant's teenage daughters.

[Frenequesta]

I'd say a lot of useful inventions that derived from developments of the gun would not be invented after the year 3,000.

[Felids]

If guns weren't invented...

I'd buy a helicopter and rain death from the skies in the form of plagued cows.

And napalm.

Neither of those have anything to do with guns, right?

What exactly is the scenario here? Just gunpowder?

[Genivar]

Then we would have made upgrades to crossbows over the years instead of guns. Would be cheaper I bet.
Also, I want Van Helsings Automatic Crossbow.

[Caninope]

Well, if we are talking about gunpowder...

There might still be firearms (no, I am not talking about crossbows, composite bows, trebuchets, catapults, et cetera- I'm talking rifles, pistols, muskets, and cannons), but they might not necessarily be viewed as being as practical. People would've developed firearms anyway, but they would operate using steam or airpower. The drawback of those two methods are that steam weapons are inefficient and clumsy and lack range and power the gunpowder firearms have. As for early airguns, it would've been easier from what I here to make them a multi-shot weapon and did not need dry weather to work properly (a drawback of early gunpowder weapons), however they were much more difficult to maintain and probably more expensive. There would still be research done to figure out how to construct light weight armor (like kevlar), only difference is that it would have deflect a blade instead of a bullet. Lighter, easier to wield, cheaper swords and pole arms would be developed, however they would not necessarily be the same as medieval weapons- it would be like comparing a first generation medieval hand cannon to an M 16 or a MetalStorm firearm- same basic principle but two completely different kinds of weapons.

Except kevlar is far fucking heavier then plate armour. And if swords were any lighter, they would be as useless as a plastic bat.

And swords were already developed to its pinnacle, only their role modified from zweihanders to sabres when people stopped wearing armour thanks to gunpowder.

Considering Kevlar is stronger than steel on a 5-1 weight basis, I'm going to call BS on it being heavier than plate armor.

[Genivar]

Except kevlar is far fucking heavier then plate armour. And if swords were any lighter, they would be as useless as a plastic bat.

And swords were already developed to its pinnacle, only their role modified from zweihanders to sabres when people stopped wearing armour thanks to gunpowder.

Considering Kevlar is stronger than steel on a 5-1 weight basis, I'm going to call BS on it being heavier than plate armor.

I have to agree.

[The Soviet Technocracy]

Soldiers would carry newer, lighter weight crossbows that fire new arrows designed for high velocity and light weight over heavy, barbed tips. Most would complain about the lack of stopping power of these new, lighter arrows and bitch about how the sand is always gumming up the freshly lubricated servos of their complicated electronics. Then they bitch more about how hard it is to clean without metal toothpicks and how they have to dismantle their crossbows during combat or use the manual cocking lever. They'd also cry about how the servos need constant lubrication and people would complain that the crossbow is too wide for mechanised warfare, leading to a reduction in bow width and draw, thus reducing stopping power much to the hatred of the very soldiers who were bitching and then they realised that it would just be better to go back to barbed tips.

Also we don't have bullet resistant vests we have arrow resistant vests and all tanks fire regular tank rounds because no modern firearm uses gunpowder anymore.

[Genivar]

Better idea, you guys be my retainers.

I give you lands and shit you can do whatever in, and if bigger bros come and try to take our shit we gang up and beat them and steal their monie and wimminz

we'll call it feudalism

Eh I would rather run to the nearest town, hide for a year and a day and become a blacksmith. It was an option in late Medieval society.

Sounds like running off to Mexico back in the old west days.

[Korintar]

Except kevlar is far fucking heavier then plate armour. And if swords were any lighter, they would be as useless as a plastic bat.

And swords were already developed to its pinnacle, only their role modified from zweihanders to sabres when people stopped wearing armour thanks to gunpowder.

Medieval blacksmith didn't know of the benefits of titanium,tungsten, or aluminum and you talk like cutting is the only thing that matters.

We have alloys they did not have back then- which could effect the weight and strength of the weapons. People might've stopped wearing heavy plate armor eventually anyway, if powerful enough air or steam guns were able to be developed, however firearms would not be as widespread as they are in this world, due to the aforementioned reasons. Also, the heavier plate armors were partly a response to gun powder.

[Johz]

Catapults would be considered WMDs...

And trebuchets the H bombs of the world.

If we continue this war, it could take years to beat the Japanese. We can't lose that many men.
I agree. It's time to bring out our top secret weapons... Let's drop a trebuchet on their heads!

[Risottia]

Catapults would be considered WMDs...

Expecially if loaded with the corpses of those who died of the plague.

[Hironeidan]

Crossbows would have put plate armour out of business anyway. They were more than capable of killing knights at close range in late feudal era, and they were considered "dishonourable" for the way in which a peasant could kill a half-tonne heavy cavalryman with one after three weeks training.

That said, we'd still have most of our technology without gunpowder discovery - Byzantium most likely would have lasted much longer in the face of an Ottoman empire without gunpowder weaponry, and there's all sorts of potential scenarios historically that lead on from that, including a (quite plausibly) much stronger legacy of Christianity in the middle east as opposed to Islam.

We still knew how to write, we still had ingenuity in creating things such as glass to keep wine bottled, which led to glasses for scholars to wear to keep them studying for longer. Sailing would most likely be unaffected, so discovery of the new world would remain unaffected. A history of widespread Caribbean piracy would probably be somewhat inhibited without cannon, the conquistadors would probably have had a tougher time of their crushing the Aztec, Zapotec, Mayan, Inca empires (but iron armour still equates to a trump card there), which probably would entail higher native populations in the Americas.

Questions like these can't really be answered definitively, the best you'll do is speculate. I particularly like the Byzantine chain to pursue.

[The Soviet Technocracy]

Instead of ATGMs we have...

wait shit nothing in a missile uses gunpowder nvm.

Instead of cannons we have ballistas.

So ballistas and ATGMs that's a doozy.

[Futurephilosostan]

Well, the face of battle would have been changed, but destructive capabilities of people - not so much.

Steam engine -> internal combustion engine are not dependent on gunpowder. So modern armies would still firebomb cities (with planes dropping barrels of oil and mobile artillery platforms = large tanks with ballistas/catapults would throw burning stones on the cities), we would still have armored cars only with automatic crossbows mounted on top of them and such...

And since crossbow bolts may not be as lethal as bullets, probably more research would have gone in fast-acting poisons, so short range ranged combat would still be lethal enough so that no fight should turn into sword melee, just like today...