Firearms

[kalifer]

The first real firearms appeared in China. Chronicles recorded the use of a wooden «fire spear» (a prototype of a hand-held arquebus) in 1132. This is considered the official beginning of the era of firearms. 

How about adding firearms to the game? Of course, these wouldn’t be modern assault rifles, but rather some ancient weapons that take a very long time to reload. What do you think?

I know there are mods, but I’m talking about the game itself.

[jaelyn666]

I think it's a great idea, we have gears and windmills so the world is already somewhat industrial, I think some black powder guns would fit the theme well, the hunter should get a bonus to the guns, maybe even give us a high powered musket we can use to hunt big game, maybe the hunter has a quicker reload speed snd increased damage. We also need some way to hang the gun on the wall as a decoration above the mantel.

[LadyWYT]

5 hours ago, kalifer said:

The first real firearms appeared in China. Chronicles recorded the use of a wooden «fire spear» (a prototype of a hand-held arquebus) in 1132. This is considered the official beginning of the era of firearms. 

How about adding firearms to the game? Of course, these wouldn’t be modern assault rifles, but rather some ancient weapons that take a very long time to reload. What do you think?

I'm not against it entirely, given that firearms were beginning to catch on in Europe during the late Middle Ages. However...I would expect any firearms added to reflect that level of tech as well. That is...expensive, slow to reload, poor accuracy, and limited damage versus armor. Not a musket, so much as a hand cannon. Through some grenades in there too--expensive, short range, but good against groups of enemies.

In any case, I wouldn't expect much from firearms. They'd be a neat novelty item to play with late-game, but hardly that useful outside of very specific scenarios. For damage overall, they should be easily outclassed by the bow simply due to the rate of fire and accuracy, especially at range.

Edited September 25, 2025 by LadyWYT

[StCatharines]

22 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

For damage overall, they should be easily outclassed by the bow simply due to the rate of fire and accuracy, especially at range.

Yes, as they very much were in reality, for well over a century when bows/crossbows and firearms first coexisted in Europe.

[LadyWYT]

24 minutes ago, StCatharines said:

Yes, as they very much were in reality, for well over a century when bows/crossbows and firearms first coexisted in Europe.

Exactly. If I recall correctly, the bow was still able to outclass firearms even in the 1600-1700s, just due to fire rate--bows could be fired about twice as fast, I think, with a bit more range and accuracy. However, bows required a lot more practice to use at that level of expertise, whereas muskets took a lot less practice, and advances in firearms eventually meant that the advantages a bow might have were diminished.

In any case, I'd expect any firearms added to Vintage Story to be on the same level as the earliest medieval European firearms, to preserve both the medieval flavor as well as overall game balance. In a singleplayer scenario, a firearm is likely most useful either at very close range against a single target(where it's not really possible to miss) or against clusters of targets(where accuracy isn't really a concern, since you're bound to hit something). In multiplayer, firearms would be a bit more useful since they could be massed, but the expense of crafting and maintaining them could be a struggle depending on how many players need to be equipped.

[kalifer]

3 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

I'm not against it entirely, given that firearms were beginning to catch on in Europe during the late Middle Ages. However...I would expect any firearms added to reflect that level of tech as well. That is...expensive, slow to reload, poor accuracy, and limited damage versus armor. Not a musket, so much as a hand cannon. Through some grenades in there too--expensive, short range, but good against groups of enemies.

In any case, I wouldn't expect much from firearms. They'd be a neat novelty item to play with late-game, but hardly that useful outside of very specific scenarios. For damage overall, they should be easily outclassed by the bow simply due to the rate of fire and accuracy, especially at range.

“I am sure that there is a blueprint for a firearm in Tobias’ workshop , we just need to find/add it.”

[DUCATISLO]

firearms and  new combat system 

[Captain Kaboom]

I think a Matchlock Arquebus would fit the game well, they were more powerful, accurate and user-friendly than the hand-cannon so they can be a big upgrade over bows, but are still low-tech enough to fit the games medieval/early Renaissance aesthetic.
 

 

Edited October 4, 2025 by Captain Kaboom

[Facethief]

11 hours ago, Captain Kaboom said:

I think a Matchlock Arquebus would fit the game well, they were more powerful, accurate and user-friendly than the hand-cannon so they can be a big upgrade over bows, but are still low-tech enough to fit the games medieval/early Renaissance aesthetic.

I’d definitely prefer having bows remain as a valid weapon, with the firearms being more of a glass cannon sidegrade.

[Captain Kaboom]

8 hours ago, Facethief said:

I’d definitely prefer having bows remain as a valid weapon, with the firearms being more of a glass cannon sidegrade.

Totally agree, bows absolutely should have a much faster reload than any muzzle-loading musket, just like IRL.
But the Arquebus should also have a much higher damage per shot, making it preferable for fighting more dangerous foes like Bears, Drifters and Bosses.

[Captain Kaboom]

To add to this discussion there could also be anachronistic elements of firearms tech added and mixed together, like rifled barrels and minie bullets, though I think breach-loading would be a step too far. 

Edited October 8, 2025 by Captain Kaboom

[LadyWYT]

On 10/5/2025 at 2:28 PM, Captain Kaboom said:

But the Arquebus should also have a much higher damage per shot, making it preferable for fighting more dangerous foes like Bears, Drifters and Bosses.

This is actually one reason I'm more in favor of handcannons than proper guns: boss fights shouldn't be trivial encounters, and guns that are both high damage and accurate would almost certainly make them so. Sure, a long reload time balances a gun somewhat against a bow, but the thing is...the player can just carry multiple loaded firearms, fire them at closer range to make sure each shot hits, and then finish off whatever's left of the enemy.

At a glance, the arquebus also seems to have been invented around the early 1500s, so it does qualify as a late medieval weapon. However, while the setting of Vintage Story is the late Middle Ages, I believe the more specific timeframe is somewhere between the late 1200s and early 1400s(if I'm not mistaken, the specified year in the game code is 1386). The reason I say that is that's the time period that both the Hanseatic League and the Byzantine Empire existed, and both are referenced directly by certain in-game items. 

I suppose it's an area that could still be anachronistic, and something like a matchlock could be added, but in that case I would probably also make it so that such firearms are ineffective in wet weather, or otherwise ineffective if the powder gets wet(so don't go swimming with them either!). That way, it still a more powerful weapon in comparison to the bow, but a lot more finicky to use. 

[Thorfinn]

It just turns VS into an arms race. Even CO does that, particularly when combined with XSkills. You need to add even more nasty foes to balance out the mid or late game hand cannons, or battle becomes trivial.

There's a reason there are not better spears in the game. It's because even at one per slot, steel spears would totally dominate, well, everything.

[DUCATISLO]

On 9/25/2025 at 6:00 PM, LadyWYT said:

I'm not against it entirely, given that firearms were beginning to catch on in Europe during the late Middle Ages. However...I would expect any firearms added to reflect that level of tech as well. That is...expensive, slow to reload, poor accuracy, and limited damage versus armor. Not a musket, so much as a hand cannon. Through some grenades in there too--expensive, short range, but good against groups of enemies.

In any case, I wouldn't expect much from firearms. They'd be a neat novelty item to play with late-game, but hardly that useful outside of very specific scenarios. For damage overall, they should be easily outclassed by the bow simply due to the rate of fire and accuracy, especially at range.

>That is...expensive, slow to reload, poor accuracy, and limited damage versus armor

please stop with this meme

[LadyWYT]

15 minutes ago, DUCATISLO said:

>That is...expensive, slow to reload, poor accuracy, and limited damage versus armor

please stop with this meme

It might be a meme, but that doesn't mean it's not true.  I wouldn't necessary call medieval firearms weak, as much as I would very clumsy and ineffective compared to more modern firearms. The main advantages initially were the ease of training and the shock factor, because boomstick is very scary to those unfamiliar with the concept. Poor accuracy is compensated for simply by massing gunpowder units and firing in volleys. As for armor, guns are one reason that cavalry shifted away from full suits of armor to a heavy cuirass instead. The curiass will protect one of the most vital parts of the body, and the metal can be made thick enough to withstand gunfire while still being light enough for the soldier in question to actually use. If I'm recalling correctly, it wasn't just metal armor that was effective in withstanding early guns either; some Native American shields could stop musket shot, provided the rawhide used to make the shield was thick enough. In any case, it wasn't until muskets were introduced and improved, and rifling discovered(both of which were post-Middle Ages), that firearms became strong enough for classic armor to lose its value.

From a gameplay standpoint, it's not out of the question to include firearms in a medieval setting, but firearms shouldn't be so strong that they easily outclass the other available weapons and become the default "must-have" for players to rush to acquire. They really ought to be just a supplemental weapon to the late game options we have already, so "expensive, slow to reload, poor accuracy/shorter range, and limited damage to heavy armor" is fairly realistic and balanced. I think Age of Empires 2 handled the balance of gunpowder in a medieval setting quite well: the gunpowder units were a late game option(for appropriate civilizations) and offered very powerful attacks, but were expensive, had slow rates of fire, limited range, and poor accuracy. In order for gunpowder units to be effective, you had to mass them in order to ensure enough shots landed to efficiently kill targets.

[DUCATISLO]

2 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

It might be a meme, but that doesn't mean it's not true.  I wouldn't necessary call medieval firearms weak, as much as I would very clumsy and ineffective compared to more modern firearms. The main advantages initially were the ease of training and the shock factor, because boomstick is very scary to those unfamiliar with the concept. Poor accuracy is compensated for simply by massing gunpowder units and firing in volleys. As for armor, guns are one reason that cavalry shifted away from full suits of armor to a heavy cuirass instead. The curiass will protect one of the most vital parts of the body, and the metal can be made thick enough to withstand gunfire while still being light enough for the soldier in question to actually use. If I'm recalling correctly, it wasn't just metal armor that was effective in withstanding early guns either; some Native American shields could stop musket shot, provided the rawhide used to make the shield was thick enough. In any case, it wasn't until muskets were introduced and improved, and rifling discovered(both of which were post-Middle Ages), that firearms became strong enough for classic armor to lose its value.

From a gameplay standpoint, it's not out of the question to include firearms in a medieval setting, but firearms shouldn't be so strong that they easily outclass the other available weapons and become the default "must-have" for players to rush to acquire. They really ought to be just a supplemental weapon to the late game options we have already, so "expensive, slow to reload, poor accuracy/shorter range, and limited damage to heavy armor" is fairly realistic and balanced. I think Age of Empires 2 handled the balance of gunpowder in a medieval setting quite well: the gunpowder units were a late game option(for appropriate civilizations) and offered very powerful attacks, but were expensive, had slow rates of fire, limited range, and poor accuracy. In order for gunpowder units to be effective, you had to mass them in order to ensure enough shots landed to efficiently kill targets.

I'M NOT READING ALL THAT RAAAAH!!!

[Thorfinn]

IOW, could you please turn that into a meme, @LadyWYT? Maybe something with those two women and the cat would be nice.

 

Edited October 10, 2025 by Thorfinn

[Dra6o0n]

Just bombs would be fine, firearms are essentially 'part' explosives.

[Facethief]

10 hours ago, Dra6o0n said:

Just bombs would be fine, firearms are essentially 'part' explosives.

They are just shaped explosives.

[LadyWYT]

On 10/10/2025 at 6:16 PM, Thorfinn said:

IOW, could you please turn that into a meme, @LadyWYT? Maybe something with those two women and the cat would be nice.

 

If I had the right spark to make that kind of meme, I'd take a stab at it. 

Of course, now that I think about it, if the players are allowed to have firearms in the game, then it's only fair to let some of the monsters have them too. People think the bowtorns are bad, but imagine turret locusts.

[hstone32]

On 10/12/2025 at 2:56 PM, LadyWYT said:

If I had the right spark to make that kind of meme, I'd take a stab at it. 

Of course, now that I think about it, if the players are allowed to have firearms in the game, then it's only fair to let some of the monsters have them too. People think the bowtorns are bad, but imagine turret locusts.

Ooooooh. What if special firearm enemies thet only appear during temporal storms? I've felt like temporal storms ought to have more danger to them.

or how about, exploding suicide enemies? No survival game has done that before.

[Bruno Willis]

On 10/11/2025 at 9:01 AM, LadyWYT said:

some Native American shields could stop musket shot, provided the rawhide used to make the shield was thick enough.

The Scottish Highlanders could reliably catch bullets with their shields too, which were leather, wood and lots of little metal studs. A musket bullet would punch through easily if it struck straight on, but they held them at an angle which meant the bullets either ricocheted off the studs or burrowed into the wood. 

[LadyWYT]

1 hour ago, hstone32 said:

Ooooooh. What if special firearm enemies thet only appear during temporal storms? I've felt like temporal storms ought to have more danger to them.

Possibly, but I was thinking something more along the lines of the dwarven ballista from Skyrim, in that it's a sentient mechanical contraption rather than a rotbeast. In that case, I would expect it to be lurking in a larger ruin underground, or perhaps a bunker carved into a mountainside. That would make mountains a little more exciting for players to run across.

[Tabulius]

On 10/5/2025 at 4:07 AM, Facethief said:

I’d definitely prefer having bows remain as a valid weapon, with the firearms being more of a glass cannon sidegrade.

Even up to the American revolutionary war people were still arguing the merits of archery in a military context. So I think bows shouldn't be outmoded by early matchlocks.

[Shoom]

Crossbows would be neat, fires instantly unlike the bow but has a long reload leaving you vulnerable and a somewhat expensive recipe requiring both a bow stave and some metal parts, maybe give the hunter class a exclusive recipe for a better version. There could also be a late-game recipe for a semi-automatic Van Helsing style crossbow requiring Jonas parts, a bit over-powered but considering just how arduous of a task Jonas devices are to craft in the first place I think it'd be fine, a schematic for it could be locked behind story progression like the glider.

Edited October 17, 2025 by Shoom