Rapiers

redwing · Jun 28, 2008

I never claimed to be a historian. The most history information I get is from my middle school textbooks, the history channel, or wikipedia.

I was just curious how rapiers in the real world would actually hold up against other weapons that are much larger, i.e. bastard swords and great axes. I can visualize a knight wielding a bastard sword parrying blows from a great axe wielded by an orcish barbarian (even though bastard swords weren't historical, and orcs are not real in any sense), however I find it ruins my suspension of disbelief when a swashbuckler wielding a rapier replaces the knight.

How does a flimsy blade stand against a great axe? Is there actually any real world possibility of this happening? I understand this probably isn't the most intelligent question, but I thought I'd just give it a shot.

xechnao · Jun 28, 2008

Any long blade sword (like long sword, bastard sword, two handed sword) can't penetrate plate armor. Rapiers can't penetrate possibly any armor and parry any long-medium weapon heavier than another rapier.

Theron · Jun 28, 2008

Historically, rapiers were civilian weapons, not military. As such, they didn't have to rate against weapons intended for battlefield use.

sukael · Jun 28, 2008

redwing said:
How does a flimsy blade stand against a great axe? Is there actually any real world possibility of this happening? I understand this probably isn't the most intelligent question, but I thought I'd just give it a shot.

Here's a potential visualization: the rapier-wielder moves smoothly with the enemy's blows, using his weapon only to deflect those attacks just enough to avoid the brunt of the blow.

malladin · Jun 28, 2008

Don't forget that what a lot of people think of as Rapiers are actually epees and foils developed for modern fencing. The historical rapier is a significantly heavier weapon, though no bastard sword, we had a civil war where they were quite a popular military weapon.

WayneLigon · Jun 28, 2008

malladin said:
Don't forget that what a lot of people think of as Rapiers are actually epees and foils developed for modern fencing. The historical rapier is a significantly heavier weapon, though no bastard sword, we had a civil war where they were quite a popular military weapon.

Indeed. Part of the problem with discussing most mideival weapons is that the same name gets used over and over again for various types and kinds of swords. Not all rapiers are the springy little 'Three Musketeers' weapons most people think of. It's just a lighter blade. Also, most weapons don't directly parry other weapons; that's what the shield is there for.

Imp · Jun 28, 2008

Yeah, RW rapiers were made to game reach, not speed, esp. early on – they were about as heavy or heavier than any other one-handed sword and could parry them basically just fine.

Now, if you're talking something closer to a smallsword (epee), you'd avoid doing straight-on parries – your game would be absence-of-blade plus stop hits. "Realistically," you'd need a big skill and speed advantage to do this reliably against a big guy with a big axe, but it's not completely and totally out of bounds for such a thing to happen.

There are parries that don't directly intercept the opponent's line of attack, which a lighter blade can use to deal with a heavier one, though it's not the sort of thing that would really work with a smallsword vs. two-handed axe...

Dannyalcatraz · Jun 28, 2008

In addition to what has been said before, there's the matter that the weapons in question were popular in vastly different eras.

Rapiers became the personal melee weapon of choice from the 15th century on- about the time when firearms were beginning to make heavy armor impractical. Without heavy armor to defeat, melee weapons could be smaller, faster and lighter.

Which was good, since the intended targets- no longer encased head-to-toe in full armor- were now more mobile and able to dodge blows from heavier weapons. The small, fast thrusting sword replaced the heavier, slower slashing weapons of earlier years.

To the original question....

I forget the film in which this appeared, but there was a scene in a movie in which the hero was using a rapier or saber was trying to fend off a brute of a foe swinging a 2 hander. His first parry attempt turned his saber into a flat-pointed dinner knife.

In reality, its unlikely that a quality weapon would shatter thus. The rapiers and sabers typically have a diamond-shaped cross-section, so they're a lot sturdier than they look. Better thrusting blades with high-quality steel also tended to have quite a bit of flex to them.

However, it probably would be severely bent- possibly notched- by parrying a blow by a much larger and heavier blade.

For more info, check out Oakeshott's sword typology:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakeshott_typology
http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_spotxviii.html

pawsplay · Jun 29, 2008

A historical rapier is really just what D&D calls a "longsword." It's a 2 1/2 to 3 foot long cut-and-thrust sword that weighs probably about 2.5 lbs.

A fencing rapier is something else... even the weapon that preceded the smallsword was already very different from a battlefield weapon.

So the answer to this question really depends on whether we're talking 15th cenruty, 17th century, 19th century, and whether we're talking England and northen Europe or Italy.

I'll make the answer even muddier. In the 17th century, both the rapier and katana were three foot long cut and thrust weapons that weighed about 2.5 pounds. The rapier was generally used one handed and was straight for stabbing, the katana was generally curved and used for slashing. So if you ask "rapier versus bastard sword" and if by bastard sword you mean "the katana is a bastard sword in D&D," then the rapier is not at any particular disadvantage.

Tarek · Jul 1, 2008

For that matter, most weapons apart from daggers, polearms, and the two handed swords, weighed between two and three lbs. Even the largest practical two-hander weighed no more than six and a half/seven lbs, and averaged close to four and a half to five.

Weight is always an issue when it comes to weapons that a soldier will have to carry around all day, every day.

I agree with Danny Alcatraz; Movies are terrible examples of how medieval combat worked. Blades snapping from a single blow from another blade just *did not happen*. Blades snapping after hours of combat when someone struck a rock hard, or wedged it into a tree stump and pulled just the wrong way to free it, that might happen.

More often, swords would become bent and have to be straightened, usually accomplished on the battlefield by bracing the sword against the ground and stepping on the bent portion until the sword was usable again. Soldiers and knights were trained to parry with the flat of the blade specifically to avoid chipping the edge.

Rapiers

redwing

First Post

xechnao

First Post

Theron

Explorer

sukael

First Post

malladin

Explorer

WayneLigon

Adventurer

Imp

First Post

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator

pawsplay

Hero

Tarek

Explorer

Similar Threads