[quote=@Angry Friend]
<Snipped quote by EnterTheHero>

If it's Renaissance-era weaponry then you should Imagine flintlock and Snaplock Muskets, Though i'd imagine they coexisted among their predecessor the arquebus. So not the most primitive of firearms but they would still take a while to load and wouldn't really be all that accurate. They'd also have an Arch nemesis in water, when the powder inside the gun is wet you can't ignite it which means you can't shoot.

Also remember, soldiers in the Renaissance still wore plate armor and not all guns were able to pierce the chest plate of an armor. Although i must personally admit that I don't really know how Varromere imagines armor in his world.
[/quote]

There's also the fact that the term "Renaissance" itself can refer to anywhere between the 14th to the 17th centuries, which is a long time. There were multiple turnovers of trends and equipment in warfare during these four hundred years. Combined with a closer look at regional Renaissances, in Italy and other European states, there's quite a broad range to cover. 
The matchlock arquebus is relevant throughout this period, although the very early types in the 13th century were more like early hand gonnes. The term "musket" initially referred to heavier firearms; fired by resting the gun on a fork rest planted on the ground. Matchlock muskets were slightly deadlier at longer range, and supplanted arquebuses until the end of the 17th century, where lighter versions replaced them altogether. Muskets and other guns with flintlock mechanisms only started appearing in great numbers around the mid 17th century. The matchlock, followed by the wheellock, would be the dominant mechanisms during our timeframe.