>>96889539
>why are firearms a bridge too far?
The gun represents the endpoint of infantry weapons as we know them and completely rewrite tactics and strategy used in warfare. It is not set dressing to be carelessly throw around. Historical warriors like the classic mounted knight, wayward japanese samurai, and general front line pike-man or common foot solider with a blade go extinct the second you introduce guns into the setting. In a reasonable setting with guns EVERY humanoid warrior must carry a fun to fight. Fantasy tropes like the bearded dwarf wielding a battleaxe or the master elvish archer just become silly when you can hand a peon a gun and have him blow ether of them away in a single shot.

Guns are the death of fantasy and settings that attempt to have guns coexist with any melee weapons are completely lost or forced to severely limit the guns within their settings. Guns also carry a mechanic expectation other weapons do not posses. A bullet is faster the any blade and can fly further or higher than any arrow. A solider wielding the very best weapon ever conceived in modern warfare is expected to have some keyword or ability that represents what it can do just as as a skilled warrior or one with a long weapon is represented with first strike.

The only part wotc is getting wrong about guns is introducing settings where guns should reasonably exist and not avoiding the question entirely by keeping magic set in an age before the gun should be readily available to all. Vehicles can and have been depicted in a fantasy friendly manner. Bombs by nature are usually traps which is still easy to depict in a fantasy setting without rewriting all the rules.