Top 10 odd D&D weapons

[hamishspence]

Studded leather and swords

I think I also saw a reference on Dragon 323 that said the Mongols (Ghengis Khan era) wore studded leather.

On swords: if my memory is right the greatsword in D&D is 6 Lb. I went through the net and Claymores (old twohander, NOT basket hilted one-hander) seem to range between 5 and 7 Lb. Pretty good bracketing. And the claymore is supposed to be unusually light and fast (say the websites)

Dinosaurs: Faerun has them: Chult, + some areas of Heartlands. Eberron has a more integrated dino-halfling culture. Not sure about Greyhawk.

My idea of a mercurial weapon was: Ordinary sword with so called blood-channel on either side. Extend channel into hollow hilt. Layer of metal over channel to protect it. Voila: sword which has normal durability + shifting weight. Most attacks would either be edge to edge or flat to flat. So chance of plating being broken isn't to high. And since under the plating is a normal sword, even loss of mercury won't mean broken sword. Hollow hilt means shift of weight to blade would be noticable.

Whether it would be practical is another thing, but it does demonstrate you can have the channel without wreaking the weapon.

 

[lukelightning]

My idea of a mercurial weapon was: Ordinary sword with so called blood-channel on either side. Extend channel into hollow hilt. Layer of metal over channel to protect it. Voila: sword which has normal durability + shifting weight. Most attacks would either be edge to edge or flat to flat. So chance of plating being broken isn't to high. And since under the plating is a normal sword, even loss of mercury won't mean broken sword. Hollow hilt means shift of weight to blade would be noticable.

I think the flex of the blade would soon break the metal over the channel.

 

[big dummy]

I think I also saw a reference on Dragon 323 that said the Mongols (Ghengis Khan era) wore studded leather.

Mongols used all kinds of armor including leather, but as far as I know, never anything like the infaous D&D "studded leather". The most common would be simple padded felt, maile and lamellar (leather and iron).

If you are curious about it, this is an excellent website on Mongol armor of all types, very well researched.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/3505/

On swords: if my memory is right the greatsword in D&D is 6 Lb.

your memory is wrong the greatsword in 3.5 D&D is 8 lbs. If MY memory is right thats actually down from 15 in 3.0 D&D.

I went through the net and Claymores (old twohander, NOT basket hilted one-hander) seem to range between 5 and 7 Lb. Pretty good bracketing. And the claymore is supposed to be unusually light and fast (say the websites)

The Scottish Claim-De-Liamh or two hander is a good candidate, it's sort of inbetween the traditional greatsword and the zweihander in length, being up to 5' long and could weigh up to around 5 or 6 lbs, though most surviving examples which seem to have been combat ready were about 3-4 lbs.

My idea of a mercurial weapon was: Ordinary sword with so called blood-channel on either side. Extend channel into hollow hilt. Layer of metal over channel to protect it. Voila: sword which has normal durability + shifting weight. Most attacks would either be edge to edge or flat to flat. So chance of plating being broken isn't to high. And since under the plating is a normal sword, even loss of mercury won't mean broken sword. Hollow hilt means shift of weight to blade would be noticable.

Whether it would be practical is another thing, but it does demonstrate you can have the channel without wreaking the weapon.

Very unlikely you could make steel thick enough to protect the channel, especially since most displacement (parrying) was done with the flat of the blade in Western fencing, and also in that amount of space you probably wouldn't be able to fit enough mercury to make a difference in weight... not that that difference would actually help you in any way if you could! (read the rest of the thread for more on this..)

BD

 

[big dummy]

If you mean "resist as in avoid getting punctured" then possibly yes. If you mean "resist as in keeping the person alive" then the answer is a resounding no. A lion or especially a bear could easily produce enough force to affect the joints of the armor and possibly pull it apart. You know Project Grizzly? This guy has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to make a grizzly-proof suit, with limited success.

Yeah I'm familair with project grizzly, quite amusing. And yes, I agree that in a knock down drag-out, a sufficiently clever monster the size of a brown bear could always rip your arms off or twist your head off.

However I did recently see a "when animals attack" show on Discovery where a guy actually fought a big Grizzly bear with a hunting knife and mortally wounded it, before finishing it off with his gun. A Grizzly moreover which had just recently killed another hunter.

Bottom line, if I did have to fight a Grizzly bear for some very unwelcome reason, I would much rather do so in full plate harness than unarmored. In attacks I've read about and seen on cable, Grizzlys often seem to bite the heads and rip open the abdomen of their victims with their claws, neither of which would have much effect if you were in armor. The armor would also definately discourage and harm the bear as it tried to kill you, and bears like many animals can be disuaded from attack by even slight injuries or pain. Even the buffeting effect of a bear paw, from some of the blows I've seen people ignore in steel helmets in training I think you'd have a much better chance of remaining conscious with that armor on.


Again, if I had to, I would also prefer to fight a grizzly with a nice long spear with a cross-bar, so that I could thrust into him before he closed to grapple distance with me. Which brings me back to those simple rules mods. If I had a nice +6 To Hit advantage for reach it might give me an extra fighting chance to fend that bear off.

Thats probably why people who did hunt dangerous animals like boars and bears on foot using hand weapons (and some still do) traditionally used a spear. For the reach.

(Of course there are some psychos out there who hunt animals like that with knives. )

BD

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I believe the best European body armor that existed historically could withstand the attack of any of the numerous quite fearsome predators which exist in the real world, including bears, tigers, lions, wolves, sharks and even 20 foot saltwater crocodiles.

I don't think so. In a discussion of fullplate on the History Channel International, they were showing the effects of sword blows and expecially the "Murder Blow" from swordfighting manuals (its a 2 handed overhead strike with the attacker grasping the blade of his sword aiming at the head, using the sword's crossbar like a blunt pick) upon the armor wearers. By and large, the armor turned the blows, but the force of the blows would have done significant blunt trauma to the wearer. The Murder Blow, if solidly landed would likely have caused a severe concussion if not unconsciousness.

And most of those predators can develop as much or more force with their blows. A bear's claw-swat or a leopard's "punch" could easily knock a man unconscious if not killing him outright. Unless he drives the creature off or kills it outright, a determined predator could kill a man in fullplate.

Quick! Someone make the Chivalry and Carnosaurs setting! Dino-mounted knights questing to stop the t-rex that's been terrorizing the countryside! Tricerotops jousts!

Dude- change the name to Carnosaurs & Cavaliers and I'll buy it!

BTW, there's a writer named Kurt R.A. Giambastiani who has an alt fantasy history series in which dinos still exist (in 1800s USA at least), so the Native American tribes who have "domesticated" some of them managed to hold off American expansion and genocide. Custer didn't die at Little Big Horn because the Americans never got that far...and he became President instead. His son, however, winds up on the American frontier...

Perfect for a Northern Crown campaign, IMHO.

 

[Hussar]

Y'know, reading through this gives me a hankering to play Steam-punk or Dragon-mech. Either concept does kinda make sense when you think about it. Da Vinci taken a few more steps.

 

[big dummy]

I don't think so. In a discussion of fullplate on the History Channel International, they were showing the effects of sword blows and expecially the "Murder Blow" from swordfighting manuals (its a

I know what a morstshlag is, I've been studying WMA for 7 years. It's a good way to attack armor with a tempered steel quillion using significant leverage. However, while that show can surmise as to what they think would happen, I disagree based on

One of the guys I train with uses a replica Italian barbutte. I hit him routinely hard enough to break bones if he wasn't wearing armor, and he barely even feels it.

You should watch some SCA combat some time. A 250 lb guy with 50 lbs of armor charging down a hill to smack someone in the head with a 3 lb solid wooden club can generate a lot of force too, and these guys barely even notice it. And they are wearing helmets made of as little as 16 guage simple mild steel plate for the most part.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7BIjuAdZXU

The idea of a leopard being able to knock out a man wearing a helmet like that with some kind of bruce-lee punch is laughable to me.

A really big grizzly or polar bear could possibly kill a guy in plate armor especially if he wasn't fighting back, but it would defiantely be a challenge, a painful challenge to boot.

The main thing is that their teeth and claws could not penetrate. Many people have survived bear maulings without having their heads caved in or knocked off or their rib cages caved in, again from the damage I've seen on the numerous documentaries they air on animal attacks on Discovery, Discovery Science, national geographic explorer etc. etc. the deaths and serious injuries seemed to have been caused primarily by teeth and claws.

BD

 

[Imp]

Animals are astonishingly strong and fast. You cannot compare them with humans on a pound for pound basis. You're probably right that the armor would save the person's life (and I don't see a leopard, or a tiger for that matter, being bullheaded enough to go after a guy encased in plate) – but under attack from any determined animal that's at all likely to attack a man in armor (and those are few) the human would have to get in a telling blow very quickly or be rendered helpless.

 

[Hussar]

I have to agree that a leopard isn't likely to be able to really hurt a guy wearing full plate. Then again, a leopard isn't exactly a large animal. Somewhere in the neighbourhood of 180 pounds or so IIRC. Ok, it's a big bloody cat, but, compared to monsters, it's a minor problem.

I'd be much more worried about that giant picking me up and beating me like a pinata. Sure, my armor might be in one piece at the end of things, but, all that does is provide a jello mold for my bloody corpse.

 

[big dummy]

I have to agree that a leopard isn't likely to be able to really hurt a guy wearing full plate. Then again, a leopard isn't exactly a large animal. Somewhere in the neighbourhood of 180 pounds or so IIRC. Ok, it's a big bloody cat, but, compared to monsters, it's a minor problem.

I'd be much more worried about that giant picking me up and beating me like a pinata. Sure, my armor might be in one piece at the end of things, but, all that does is provide a jello mold for my bloody corpse.

Yeah a big enough giant could definately do that, or just twist your head off like I said before.

BD