The Order is the last hope.

[Lord Dane]

Hellgate gives you technological innovation with mankind's fight against evil. Modern day Templars are tradition meets technology.

[Sir Nate]

oh snap!

[Aiden of Oreland]

You have a point Lord Dane. But Medieval Europe also had gun powder warfare. They could launch projectile lile spears (before there were cannon balls) that would blow apart thy enemy into little pieces. It wasn't used because it was unholy and unhonorable.

[SirNathanQ]

Actually, Knights coexisted with gunpowder on the battlefield for about 300 years or so. It wasn't until the 17th century, and the advent of the incredibly powerful heavy Musket (about .75 caliber, fired a solid iron (several oz.) ball that armour was truly made impractical.
Really, it was powder that allowed Europe to truly become master of the whole world. While in any post-apocalypse situation, a reversion to older, simpler, and easier methods will occur, this will only serve to put those who have a technological weapons advantage in an even better position, compared to the lesser-armed groups of people. 

"Blades don't run out of bullets" This is true, and a very good reason to always keep one handy. But blades don't kill a person at several hundred rounds a minute, nor with enough power to punch through a cinderblock wall, nor at a range up to and exceeding a mile. This is why I think guns will still remain quite important in any such situation.
Though in a zombie situation, both blades and other melee weapons and armour would regain prominent a place in battle, and trust me, no one would be happier about this than me.

[Lord Dane]

Sir Nathan speaks well as usual. However, anyone wishing for a zombie apocalypse upon us deserves to be one of the undead themselves. Let me get my new Albion for this occasion.

As sad as it is, fact is firearms and technology reign over those with lesser means of defense. Handy yes but those who are dependent upon them when they fail cannot typically resort to efficiency with simpler methods of fighting or survival. I always say: Use what you have naturally first (mind, mouth, body, skill), then progress to other means of secondary tools. Does no good to give a weapon to anyone who does not have the proper mindset or skill to use it effectively or at all for that matter.

[Aiden of Oreland]

Yes, guns are prefered today and are used because they are better. But what I'm also inferring that it requires machines to create guns and bullets. While a blade, bow, and other tools that come from mother earth are plentiful. And in todays society, more people have guns rather than swords. More display than real. But look at the fact that our group probably have more swords than guns any way. Guns will last us only for a little while after the apocalypse. But ya, if I had a real gun I would look like one of the other knights who posted himself in his armor with a gun.

[Lord Dane]

Yes, guns are prefered today and are used because they are better. But what I'm also inferring that it requires machines to create guns and bullets. While a blade, bow, and other tools that come from mother earth are plentiful. And in todays society, more people have guns rather than swords. More display than real. But look at the fact that our group probably have more swords than guns any way. Guns will last us only for a little while after the apocalypse. But ya, if I had a real gun I would look like one of the other knights who posted himself in his armor with a gun.

No I can make a simple flintlock with basic tools & parts. No machinery really needed. Just need a good knowledge of iron making/smelting or forging.

[Ian]

the beauty of early firearms were that they didn't require machines.  What's really happening here is you're allowing your romantic view of swords to overshadow the reality of early gunpowder weapons.   

A handgonne from the end of the 14th century.  At the recent living history event I attended, one group did a full demo using a reproduction version of a handgonne, complete with firing it.

[Sir Douglas]

The way I see it, if the zombie you-know-what hit the fan, your most useful weapon is going to be your brain; how well you can improvise with the supplies you have at hand (maybe that's why zombies always want to eat your brains....). You could be stuck in a bunker full of ammunition, but no guns. If you understand how ammunition works, you could throw together some pretty effective traps, or even a rudimentary firearm.

On the other hand, if you don't know what you're doing, you can just as easily make a bow that will snap in your face as you can a gun that will explode in your hand.

In a crisis scenario like that, I wouldn't discard a weapon because it was "too modern" or "too archaic". I'd use whatever I had on hand. Heck, I'd settle for a two-by-four with a nail sticking out of it if that's all I could find.

[Sir James A]

The samurai were slow to adopt firearms over bows because early firearms were prone to malfunctions or no-fires if the powder was wet, barrel was wet, etc. A wet bow will still shoot, wet arrows still work. Once firearm tech advanced, the advantages outweighed the disadvantages.

The wise warrior, knight or otherwise, would use the best tool (weapon) for the job that he has access to. That may be a firearm. That may be a sword. That may be a land mine. That may be a vat of acid. It also might be fire... there's rarely a circumstance, barring flammable areas, where "kill it with fire!" isn't an acceptable plan.

[Sir Wolf]

[Aiden of Oreland]

Well I mean like I said if I had a access to a gun I'd use it. But I just find making bow and arrows to be faster. Not trying to say "swords are better than guns". And yes a flint lock pistal is possible yet risky. They use muskets and such in "Revolution" but along side swirds, crosswbows, and arrows. Lets just all agree. Guns are technically suppior. Having access to any weapon is important. Swords are good for close quarters. Guns keep em away from you (yet bows are more accurate and faster to reload than flint locks). And it depends on the apocalypse. The key element is that we stick together. Instead of gambeson where kevlar with chainmail and plate over it. Keep a sword at your side and ranged weapon in your hands. Sorry if it seems like I cannot take a side. I just don't think our modern guns will last us years on end. And I don't trust those old guns. I'll keep my hands thank you.

[Aiden of Oreland]

Ya know what! Lets just settle on a gunblade ok.

[SirNathanQ]

Guns last. A revolver has changed very little in its design from the 1840s to today, and if the rigors of the post-civil war expansion west are a testament to anything, its that there's not much a lever-action won't survive. Coincidentally, many such guns take the powerful .45-70 Govt round, which I've been told, lends itself to being re-chambered.
A gun like that will last just as long as any bow, and be way more effective.

Also, as an archer, I can tell you a bow is no super-dependable, always ready and vigilant wonder weapon. It needs to be constantly unstrung (leaving a bow strung for more than a week will permanently twist the limbs), stored and kept out of moisture (prolonged exposure will soak into the wood, either expanding and weakening it, or foul the layers of glue holding the lamination together, quick immersion will soak and stretch the string, and foul the arrow fletchings, kiss your aim goodbye!), needs constant, almost everyday practice, and drawing and holding your aim is a huge pain. No waltzing about with your bow drawn like in movies, each shot is a calculated, thought-out effort. Also, using a bow powerful enough to actually kill will (no matter how strong you are) tire out your arms, making you less effective in melee combat.
Guns have none of those penalties, save for direct application of  high moisture volume to the powder.
Also, making serviceable bows and arrows require a career's worth of skill. You're better off looting one than making your own.     

[Sir Edward]

A board with a nail in it can save humanity. Particularly from one-eyed aliens.