Ok, so I've been noticing a significant damage difference between my sword (dark thorn blade, or Faust, depending on foe), and my gun (magma driver), as in, the gun shots do about 1/4 the damage of the sword swings at best (even the fast thorn blade). Attempting to generalize damage neutral vs neutral on the same floor.
Is this difference:
a) ranged weapons do less damage, and how significantly?
b) the Alchemer line do less damage because the bouncing shots make up for it in groups
c) mainly the lesser damage the magma driver does in exchange for doing fire
d) ok, my sword damage bonus medium from armor doesn't help much
Trying to generalize how much less damage guns tend to do in exchange for their range, basically. None of the driver line seemed to have damage listings on the wiki.
Guns are supposed to do less damage than swords of the same general star rating because of the fact that guns generally are a lower-risk form of attack as opposed to swords. If they did the same amount of damage, then there would be little contest over which would be best to use. As such, swords are for damage output at the cost of greater risk while guns are for safer engagement at the cost of lower damage output.