How long is a Greatsword?

[Imperialus]

Originally posted by KriegYour estimation seems very high (for both swords). A good rule of thumb for swords (of just about any type) is about 1lb per foot of blade.

You're most cirtanly right. I never weighed either of the swords, it was an estimate I came to by simply holding them when I was 16 years old or so, I expect they felt heavier than they actually were.

 

[Cedric]

Heh, the better question (as a few people here have hit upon) is how much would the Greatsword weigh?

Many of you may think that I am nuts, but a well made Two Handed Sword is not that heavy. (historically there is no such thing as a "Greatsword", just double edged swords obviously designed to be used with Two Hands).

Six pounds is about the MAXIMUM weight for a Two Handed Sword designed to actually be used in combat...and then, at 6 pounds I would say it was poorly made or designed for a specific purpose.

A more reasonable weight for a Two Handed sword around 56" in total length would be 3.5 - 4.5 pounds, with some variation up and down for blade width, thickness, fullers and the like.

Cedric

 

[Imperialus]

Cedric: once again though, a Flambarge would be an excption to the rule. They were rediculously heavy swords, but then again they were only designed to be swung once or twice to cut the pikes pointed at you or remove the legs of some unfortunate horse at which point you would fall back on your Katshbalger (sp?) to do the actual fighting with.

 

[Cedric]

I would very much consider a Flamberge to be a weapon designed for a special purpose...but even then.

The flamberge seen here is 63" in total length with a 46" long blade, and it only clocks in at 6 lbs, 4oz.

Granted, some are going to be larger or smaller then this one. But regardless of this, I classify these as special purpose weapons, not daily use weapons.

Cedric

 

[FluidDragon]

Heh, the better question (as a few people here have hit upon) is how much would the Greatsword weigh?

Many of you may think that I am nuts, but a well made Two Handed Sword is not that heavy. (historically there is no such thing as a "Greatsword", just double edged swords obviously designed to be used with Two Hands).

Six pounds is about the MAXIMUM weight for a Two Handed Sword designed to actually be used in combat...and then, at 6 pounds I would say it was poorly made or designed for a specific purpose.

A more reasonable weight for a Two Handed sword around 56" in total length would be 3.5 - 4.5 pounds, with some variation up and down for blade width, thickness, fullers and the like.

Cedric

Cedric is ABSOLUTELY correct. Don't be fooled by the weapon discriptions and weights in D&D and video games. This is a sore point with anyone who actualy studied ancient weapons. They simply didn't do any research on the subject, and in regards to D&D the weights of the weapons are totally off. Most weapons in the phb are listed at two or three times the actual weight. If you want to find out how much a particular type of weapon weighs then check out Museum Replicas. This is good easy site to get an APPROXIMATION of how much such an item would be. You would be surprised how light most weapons are.

You want the weapon as light as it possibly can be, as you are swinging it constantly. Even if you are very strong a weapon that is too heavy will tire you. Most weapons were effective becasue of their geometry not because they were heavy. Swords cut because of the shape of the blade bevel which is sharpend in a similar manner to an axe NOT like a razor or even a knife. They were not razor sharp, and did not need to be. If you really want to learn more go to Sword Forum. Excelletn site and they can recomend many books on the subject.

 

[Goobermunch]

Cedric is ABSOLUTELY correct. Don't be fooled by the weapon discriptions and weights in D&D and video games. This is a sore point with anyone who actualy studied ancient weapons. They simply didn't do any research on the subject, and in regards to D&D the weights of the weapons are totally off. Most weapons in the phb are listed at two or three times the actual weight. If you want to find out how much a particular type of weapon weighs then check out Museum Replicas. This is good easy site to get an APPROXIMATION of how much such an item would be. You would be surprised how light most weapons are.

You want the weapon as light as it possibly can be, as you are swinging it constantly. Even if you are very strong a weapon that is too heavy will tire you. Most weapons were effective becasue of their geometry not because they were heavy. Swords cut because of the shape of the blade bevel which is sharpend in a similar manner to an axe NOT like a razor or even a knife. They were not razor sharp, and did not need to be. If you really want to learn more go to Sword Forum. Excelletn site and they can recomend many books on the subject.

Actually, I remember when 3.0e came out. We had a long conversation about your very comment on these boards. Here's the thing. In 3.0, they increased the weight of the weapons to represent how unweildy they would be.

I'm not talking about how difficult they'd be to use, but rather how difficult they'd be to carry. Imagine walking around packing a greatsword, a long spear, and a warhammer, without a squire or a mount. Even if you'd strapped the weapons to your body, they'd make it difficult to pick your way through thick brush or a narrow passageway.

Hell, I remember wandering through Blarney Castle in Cork with a small daypack on my back. Getting through some of the narrower staircases required moving it to the front.

That's why the weights are so off. They're abstract representations of how encumbering a weapon is.

--G

PS. Every axe I've ever used for cutting wood (and I did that through high school) has been razor sharp, maybe you were referring to mauls?

 

[Staffan]

PS. Every axe I've ever used for cutting wood (and I did that through high school) has been razor sharp, maybe you were referring to mauls?

Axes I've used have generally been sharp, but not razor sharp. I mean, I wouldn't have wanted to shave with them.

 

[Goobermunch]

Axes I've used have generally been sharp, but not razor sharp. I mean, I wouldn't have wanted to shave with them.

Your axes have been dull then. It was actually a fairly common practice in the logging camps in the early 1900s for lumberjacks to shave eachother with their axes. For more info, check out "A Closer Shave: Man's Daily Search for Perfection," by Wallace G. Pinfold.

[/hijack]

--G

 

[FluidDragon]

I was refering to edge geometry when I talked about axes and razor blades. You can sharpen nearly any blade to shave with if you know what you are doing. If an axe has a flat blade geometry it will dull sooner and the edge will not be as strong. If it has a slight bevel to it then it will retain its edge longer and will be stronger and less prone to chipping, cracking or breaking.

I don't have the 3.5 PHB yet but in the 3.0 it simply stated that this is how much the item weighs. I HOPED they said some place that this figure was relative encumbrance but it did not. Just a pet peeve of mine.