Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
You Got Peanut Butter in My Chocolate...D&D and Science-Fiction
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3299987" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>What I was trying to say was that, beginning with the invention of 'rifling' (roughly about the time of the American revolution), which extended the effective range of firearms out to that of a well used longbow, 'spears and swords' still showed up on the battlefield but increasingly had no place on it even though most commanders didn't quite realize it yet. Napleon did. He realized that the fundamental battlefield weapon of his day was the cannon, because it was the cannon ultimately that was doing the most damage. Even in the Napleonic wars, most bayonet charges were survived by the simple expedient of running away from them and that's assuming that the charge wasn't in fact suicidal, which it often was. By the American civil war, bayonets were an insubstantial part of the actual mass of the battlefield, but commanders kept ordering them anyway and getting men killed uselessly. It's been calculated that less than 1% of the deaths of the American civil war occurred as the result of any melee weapon at all, much less the bayonet which many experienced soldiers didn't use in favor of swinging thier gun like a club. Not that anyone in Europe paid attention to this, which is why in WWI you have officers ordering bayonet charges against not just repeating rifles but machine guns. That worked like, oh, 1 time in 1000. There have been about three bayonet charges in the last 50 years that worked, and they all involved elite troops charging irregulars and conscripts, and even then if you look closely at them, it wasn't so much that they worked because they were driving bayonet points into the enemy. They mostly worked by running up to point blank range of the enemy and unloading an automatic weapon in his direction, usually into his back because he was running away.</p><p></p><p>In reality, melee weapons have been increasingly obselete since the 16th century. Ask the Scots. However, the role of melee weapons on the battlefield has been for that entire time overrated. Even at little big horn, the Souix won not because (or not just because) of overwhelming numbers, but if you analyze the bullets in the ground you find out that the Souix were as well equipped with firearms as the US Cavalry (and Custer had left all his heavy weapons behind). If they weren't even someone as dumb as Custer probably would have won that battle.</p><p></p><p>The few times that melee weapons overwhelmed firearms are more or less equivalent to the few times that barbarians overwhelmed Roman legions. They achieved surprise, they hit a column on the march rather than deployed for battle, they weren't fought on the terrain of the firearm wielders choosing, and they had superior numbers. That's about the only chance you've got.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ranged wins out for the same reason that Greek pikes got longer and longer. If the enemy is dead before he gets a chance to attack, you pretty much have an absolute advantage. Firearms obselete melee weapons to such a large degree because a) they take less skill to use effectively, b) they require more skill to defend against effectively, and c) they do as much damage as a beserker with a battle axe but they do it at 400 yards rather than 40 inches. Modern close combat means pointing a barrel at someone from 5' away and holding the trigger down. Knife work is relatively rare and accounts for an insignificant percentage of all casualties of war.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 3299987, member: 4937"] What I was trying to say was that, beginning with the invention of 'rifling' (roughly about the time of the American revolution), which extended the effective range of firearms out to that of a well used longbow, 'spears and swords' still showed up on the battlefield but increasingly had no place on it even though most commanders didn't quite realize it yet. Napleon did. He realized that the fundamental battlefield weapon of his day was the cannon, because it was the cannon ultimately that was doing the most damage. Even in the Napleonic wars, most bayonet charges were survived by the simple expedient of running away from them and that's assuming that the charge wasn't in fact suicidal, which it often was. By the American civil war, bayonets were an insubstantial part of the actual mass of the battlefield, but commanders kept ordering them anyway and getting men killed uselessly. It's been calculated that less than 1% of the deaths of the American civil war occurred as the result of any melee weapon at all, much less the bayonet which many experienced soldiers didn't use in favor of swinging thier gun like a club. Not that anyone in Europe paid attention to this, which is why in WWI you have officers ordering bayonet charges against not just repeating rifles but machine guns. That worked like, oh, 1 time in 1000. There have been about three bayonet charges in the last 50 years that worked, and they all involved elite troops charging irregulars and conscripts, and even then if you look closely at them, it wasn't so much that they worked because they were driving bayonet points into the enemy. They mostly worked by running up to point blank range of the enemy and unloading an automatic weapon in his direction, usually into his back because he was running away. In reality, melee weapons have been increasingly obselete since the 16th century. Ask the Scots. However, the role of melee weapons on the battlefield has been for that entire time overrated. Even at little big horn, the Souix won not because (or not just because) of overwhelming numbers, but if you analyze the bullets in the ground you find out that the Souix were as well equipped with firearms as the US Cavalry (and Custer had left all his heavy weapons behind). If they weren't even someone as dumb as Custer probably would have won that battle. The few times that melee weapons overwhelmed firearms are more or less equivalent to the few times that barbarians overwhelmed Roman legions. They achieved surprise, they hit a column on the march rather than deployed for battle, they weren't fought on the terrain of the firearm wielders choosing, and they had superior numbers. That's about the only chance you've got. Ranged wins out for the same reason that Greek pikes got longer and longer. If the enemy is dead before he gets a chance to attack, you pretty much have an absolute advantage. Firearms obselete melee weapons to such a large degree because a) they take less skill to use effectively, b) they require more skill to defend against effectively, and c) they do as much damage as a beserker with a battle axe but they do it at 400 yards rather than 40 inches. Modern close combat means pointing a barrel at someone from 5' away and holding the trigger down. Knife work is relatively rare and accounts for an insignificant percentage of all casualties of war. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
You Got Peanut Butter in My Chocolate...D&D and Science-Fiction
Top