Steve Jackson Games Forums - View Single Post

Skarg · 11-25-2020, 10:29 AM

I think Axly has the right of it. An arquebus is longer than a flintlock musket (a significantly later weapon) and so requires a stand.

Quibbling in comparison to the blunderbuss, the reason it doesn't need a stand is that you only need to point it in the general direction you want to blast. Taken to its logical conclusion, I'd say you could do that with an arquebus, but the chance to hit would be minimal: I'd have it hit on a 5 or less, and perhaps also apply a scatter effect to see which exact direction it goes.

If you want a flintlock musket instead, with no need for a stand, there's no reason you can't say the mechanicians in your area have figured out to produce such. (In fact, I did this in some parts of my original TFT campaign.) But I'd say it might be less accurate than an arquebus on a stand.

And yes, an arquebus needing 4 turns to ready after moving is not great as a mobile offensive weapon. It is still quite dangerous as a non-mobile weapon - you just need to arrange the circumstances where it'll be useful, like a lot of other specialized weapons such as a gas bomb or molotail or thrown spell, just different. e.g. Instead of opening the door and charging in, set up in a good position and have someone knock on the door, etc. In general, I feel that it's a feature that a 3d+3 ranged weapon has serious limitations on how quickly it can be set up to use, reliability, cost, etc.

11-25-2020, 10:29 AM	#26
Skarg Join Date: May 2015	Re: Not quite getting the arquebus I think Axly has the right of it. An arquebus is longer than a flintlock musket (a significantly later weapon) and so requires a stand. Quibbling in comparison to the blunderbuss, the reason it doesn't need a stand is that you only need to point it in the general direction you want to blast. Taken to its logical conclusion, I'd say you could do that with an arquebus, but the chance to hit would be minimal: I'd have it hit on a 5 or less, and perhaps also apply a scatter effect to see which exact direction it goes. If you want a flintlock musket instead, with no need for a stand, there's no reason you can't say the mechanicians in your area have figured out to produce such. (In fact, I did this in some parts of my original TFT campaign.) But I'd say it might be less accurate than an arquebus on a stand. And yes, an arquebus needing 4 turns to ready after moving is not great as a mobile offensive weapon. It is still quite dangerous as a non-mobile weapon - you just need to arrange the circumstances where it'll be useful, like a lot of other specialized weapons such as a gas bomb or molotail or thrown spell, just different. e.g. Instead of opening the door and charging in, set up in a good position and have someone knock on the door, etc. In general, I feel that it's a feature that a 3d+3 ranged weapon has serious limitations on how quickly it can be set up to use, reliability, cost, etc.