Broadsword

[Dirigible]

Well, being an obnoxious pedant doesn't keep him from being correct.

If there was fairness in the universe, though...

If history means nothing, then just call all the weapons things like "oggieblodgit", "moo-wanka", and "feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep".

Dogbrain, met .sig. .sig, meet Dogbrain.

It's like the golchinthorgleswack debate all over again

Worse than that, I've also been known to say spada di lato and punta dritta from time to time.

You kiss your mother with those lips, swordboy?

 

[^Graff]

Not that I'm implying anyhting, Dogbrain, but this is the second time you've said Grossmessern twice in this discussion... sometimes, I can go decades wihtout saying Grossmerssern.

Re that pic of the chinese broadsword earlier... (http://www.gungfu.com/pics_info_pages/sword_chinese_broad_sword_9_ring.jpg)... I'm guessing this is not a battlefield/real combat weapon? More a dancing/display sort of fing?

Actually, I've been told that it was used as a counter to grappling. The person who told me this may have been horribly wrong, but he told me that in wars between the Chinese and the Mongols, the Chinese used spears, while the mongols used weapons designed for close combat. Once a mongol got past the spear, the spearman was royally screwed. The mongols would grapple and kill with their close-in weapons.

The ringed broadsword was designed for use in a grapple. Imagine holding the weapon close to your body when someone tried to lock you in a bear hug. He'd cut himself in half when he grappled you.

So if you made any rules for that weapon, rule that it gets bounses if used in a grapple.

I dunno what the rings and the ribbon are for, though.

 

[Krieg]

There's a mention of bastard swords in (IIRC) the Osprey book about the Siege of Malta. Apparently they were highly prized for sieges, since a couple of stout knights with bastard swords and shields could stand in a breach and just hack those Turks to pieces wholesale. So highly prized in fact that anyone strong enough and good enough to use a bastard sword effectively in one hand was paid extra to reflect his unusual skills. So, definitely worthy of an EWP from that perspective.

Excellent analogy.

Was the primary source quoted?

Also may I ask who authored that particular Osprey book? (Unfortunatley it matters with Osprey at times.)

 

[MerakSpielman]

...Once a mongol got past the spear...

That's really the trick, isn't it? The better trained the spearmen are, the tougher it is to get to close-quarters. A few years of training in close-formation spear fighting tactics can go a long way. Of course, the Mongols spent years training with their weapons, too. Remember, they conquered China in the 12-13th centuries.

 

[Darklone]

Hmm, I find anything that weighs much over 2 pounds to 2 1/2 pounds is quite slow to use one-handed, especially in armour. Bastard swords are usually 3+ pounds (real ones, not D&D ones).

Not true. Viking "broadswords" had a weight around 800 gramms, bastard swords are probably at around 1.2 kg, not more.

And slow? Can't agree though our practice weapons are heavier than real ones.

 

[Dogbrain]

That's really the trick, isn't it? The better trained the spearmen are, the tougher it is to get to close-quarters. A few years of training in close-formation spear fighting tactics can go a long way. Of course, the Mongols spent years training with their weapons, too. Remember, they conquered China in the 12-13th centuries.

Mongols had long before perfected "get past that spear". It was called "arrows". Mongols were never notable stand-up fighters. Their power was in mounted archery.

 

[Ian Sturrock]

Not true. Viking "broadswords" had a weight around 800 gramms, bastard swords are probably at around 1.2 kg, not more.

I've not come across a figure as low as 800g (which is in any case very close to the 2 lb = 900g figure I quoted) but I admit I don't know a great deal about Viking-era sword weights. Most later medieval swords seem around the 2 lb mark or a little more though.

Bastard sword at 1.2 kg is of course very close to my quoted 3 lb (= 1.35 kg) figure. The average seems to have been a little more than 3 lb, but there certainly were a few lighter ones -- this page has some good stats:

http://www.palus.demon.co.uk/Sword_Stats.html

 

[Ian Sturrock]

Excellent analogy.

Was the primary source quoted?

Also may I ask who authored that particular Osprey book? (Unfortunatley it matters with Osprey at times.)

Hmm, on checking the book -- which was this one:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=P6035
-- it ain't there. You're right, they do vary in quality and I found a couple of errors in the above one, though it does have some extraordinarily cool anecdotes.

I picked it up and read it on a trip to Malta in 2002, so I'm now guessing the extra-pay-for-one-handed-bastard-sword-use factoid comes from my visit to the National Armoury of Malta on the same occasion. Though this was a major-league museum with loads of cool arms and armour (Malta is well worth a visit for anyone interested in history, BTW; stone-age goddess figures and megaliths, Phoenician shrines, and major invasions/wars from around 1500 to 1945 or so, including late medieval, Napoleonic and WWII), the written descriptions of the kit were sometimes rather scanty. I'm pretty sure the bastard sword quote comes from there, though.

My other favourite factoid garnered from the museum was that though the Siege of Malta took place in the 16th century, supposedly well into the era when guns had supplanted bows and crossbows, there was a major use of crossbows during one day of the siege; the Turks decided to mount a major assault in heavy rain, reasoning that though neither side's guns would work, they had the weight of numbers. Grand Master Valette ordered the armoury's stock of by then antique crossbows to be issued, and the attack was thereby repulsed for the day. (Some days later in the fighting, Valette, then in his seventies, was woken by a successful breach; otherwise unarmed, he grabbed a morion helmet and pike, and led an even more successful counter-attack).

Ah -- bit of a digression there. In any event, that museum was the main place I've seen where the bastard sword is mentioned as being used one-handed on foot; most of the time, it's used one-handed from horseback, or two-handed on foot (as in Talhoffer). I was able to write this into the weapon stats for Conan, in which a war sword (= bastard sword) is a martial weapon if used either two-handed, or one-handed from horseback, but is an exotic weapon when wielded one-handed on foot.

 

[Krieg]

Thanks Ian, excellent anecdotes!!

 

[Hypersmurf]

Not when initiative is cyclical, it doesn't. The weapon speed factor applied to initiative would only matter in determining who goes first in the first round. But as combat goes on, it becomes a matter of taking turns, not of "going first".

1E initiative had it sorted.

In the round that someone closed or charged to melee range, the first attack went to the person with the longer weapon, regardless of initative.

After that, however, speed factor came into play. And when there was a great disparity between speed factors - dagger and two-handed sword, for example - the opponent with the faster weapon could potentially gain more attacks than the person with the slower.

Nor when you can't spell Shakespeare.

Well, neither, of course, could Shexper.

-Hyp.