xbrokenxswordx
First Post
CalrinAlshaw said:
And where does that information come from?
-
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!
How do you carry weapons - sheaths, ties, tucks, in hand?
- Thread starter Quasqueton
- Start date
And where does that information come from?
Elder-Basilisk
First Post
That depends upon what he meant by "blunt." Historical western swords were not generally honed to razor sharpness for the simple reason that they were generally not primarily used for shaving. Instead, they were designed to cut through armor and flesh--a task that required a more chisel-like edge that could legitimately be interpreted as "blunt" compared to some other kinds of blades.
That doesn't mean they wouldn't cut. It just means that they were designed to cut particular things in particular ways. A sword that will slice a floating handkercheif in half is useful if your opponents tend to wear armor as hard as floating handkercheifs. Against steel armor, the edge doesn't focus force optimally and is likely to chip. A sword that is designed to be able to cut through steel armor probably won't cut the handkercheif that lands on it in half. However, it might well carve a man in two through his chain mail byrnie. That's what it's supposed to do.
The irony of the (I suspect apocryphal) story of Richard the Lionhearted and Saladin where Richard chops a table in half with his sword demonstrating his strength and Saladin drops a handkercheif on his scimitar and it falls in two pieces is that Richard might have been better served by the scimitar (since the Muslim forces tended to be lightly armored) and Saladin by the broadsword (since the crusaders wore heavy armor).
That doesn't mean they wouldn't cut. It just means that they were designed to cut particular things in particular ways. A sword that will slice a floating handkercheif in half is useful if your opponents tend to wear armor as hard as floating handkercheifs. Against steel armor, the edge doesn't focus force optimally and is likely to chip. A sword that is designed to be able to cut through steel armor probably won't cut the handkercheif that lands on it in half. However, it might well carve a man in two through his chain mail byrnie. That's what it's supposed to do.
The irony of the (I suspect apocryphal) story of Richard the Lionhearted and Saladin where Richard chops a table in half with his sword demonstrating his strength and Saladin drops a handkercheif on his scimitar and it falls in two pieces is that Richard might have been better served by the scimitar (since the Muslim forces tended to be lightly armored) and Saladin by the broadsword (since the crusaders wore heavy armor).
Krieg said:
Elder-Basilisk
First Post
I would figure that the claymore, bearing sword, zweihander, flamberge, and no-dachi fit the D&D greatsword concept.
Joshua Dyal said:
robberbaron
First Post
No-dachi would have large scabbards and would have been worn like any other sword.
2 handed swords generally had large portions of the blade near the hilt which had dull edges. These could be used to carry the weapon or to obtain greater control by having a hand further down the weapon.
The wavy-bladed Landsknecht sword would be a good example of a weapon that would have to be carried, though they would not have walked around out of battle with them.
Claymores are somewhat different in design and could be worn in a back scabbard.
Certainly, medieval swords were not actually very sharp. In fact, the classic longsword has been described as a sharpened crowbar.
2 handed swords generally had large portions of the blade near the hilt which had dull edges. These could be used to carry the weapon or to obtain greater control by having a hand further down the weapon.
The wavy-bladed Landsknecht sword would be a good example of a weapon that would have to be carried, though they would not have walked around out of battle with them.
Claymores are somewhat different in design and could be worn in a back scabbard.
Certainly, medieval swords were not actually very sharp. In fact, the classic longsword has been described as a sharpened crowbar.
ConcreteBuddha
First Post
robberbaron
First Post
Or the chopper in the Psychic Warrior pic.
Drakmar
Explorer
according to the documents that the medievil re-enactment group I was a member of a few years back had gotten from some recognised college of knowledge or something along those lines, the way a medievil swords designed for getting through Mail and Plate were sharpened was with a Metal File. You would sharpen the blade on about a 45 degree angle towards the hilt.. This would mean that when you hit someone and DREW the blade back, the blade would TEAR through the chain and any creases etc the impact made in the plate armour. This action was not unlike a hacksaw. Also the wound left in flesh by this kind of blade were not pretty.
What this means is that the blades are not really that sharp. Well.. not razor.. more like a rough edged hacking implement. combining a tear action with an impact action.
As for the way Greatswords, and all the big weapons were carried by Knights (the only ones to really use them).. Well.. that's what your squire and your horse was for. Polearms like a pike were carried in a hand and on a shoulder.. so were most other polearms used by peasants or militia.. Polearms like the Bec de Corbin (a knights weapon I believe) were carried by the squire on a horse etc, and given to the knight when he yelled out something along the lines of "Squire, BRING ME THE POKIE THING NOW!!!"
As for a bibligraphy of the above.. can't say I can give it.. we would need to find somebody who has studied this kind of stuff. I just spent two years hanging around them a few years back.
What this means is that the blades are not really that sharp. Well.. not razor.. more like a rough edged hacking implement. combining a tear action with an impact action.
As for the way Greatswords, and all the big weapons were carried by Knights (the only ones to really use them).. Well.. that's what your squire and your horse was for. Polearms like a pike were carried in a hand and on a shoulder.. so were most other polearms used by peasants or militia.. Polearms like the Bec de Corbin (a knights weapon I believe) were carried by the squire on a horse etc, and given to the knight when he yelled out something along the lines of "Squire, BRING ME THE POKIE THING NOW!!!"
As for a bibligraphy of the above.. can't say I can give it.. we would need to find somebody who has studied this kind of stuff. I just spent two years hanging around them a few years back.
Quasqueton
First Post
I was happy to see those pics (though how does an axe fit/sit in the axe "sheath"?) because I was specifically asking for my fantasy crap game.
Quasqueton
handforged
First Post
To use the axe holder, which can also be used for a mace, your drop the haft of the weapon through the hole and the head stops it from sliding through. The axe head would sit flat against your belt, and as long as it isn't too big stays there quite nicely. For large waraxes and the like this would be a pretty bad solution because the blade would probably be getting in the way quite a bit.
~hf
~hf
Similar Threads
