Is a Small Longsword type=slashing?

[Arrowhawk]

[MENTION=6679551]Arrowhawk[/MENTION] Again, a small longsword is different than a shortsword. They are crafted differently, they are different weapons.

None of that has been debated.

Secondly, using a padded weapon that weighs and handles the same as a longsword, reenactment is very accurate in it's ability to gauge blunt force trauma.

Actually it doesn't. The damage you'll experience from an edged weapon that does not penetrate the armor is not based on its weight, but the pounds per square inch. I thin edge can increase the amount of force experienced by a bone by an order of magnitude. So no, I don't but that you have an accurate sense of the damage that these weapons would do in REAL life...in real battles. Is it better than nothing. Definitely.

A longsword in the hands of the average fighter of the period (5'8", 160-180 pounds) will not produce the amount of damage you're saying that it will.

Whether that's true or not, if filled with above average fighters. Strength ratings off the human scale at higher levels. I also don't know too many people who put down 5'8" for the fighter height. So since we are talking about D&D...not real life, the idea that a greatsword or battle axe would break an arm that it didn't cut off, is highly probably.

Third, I would gladly allow you to attempt to break an arm (albeit covered in chain mail and not exposed), as I've taken many hits to the area in the past and only once was it broken (it was braced against an object at the time).

While I would never attempt such an activity, I think the result would be vastly different with a real sword and not a padded one. I have no doubt you are correct about the weapons you are using.

[quote To counter your final argument, I gave perfectly logical explanations as to why you should not use a shortsword as a slashing weapon, and you have chosen to ignore it[/quote] I have done no such thing. This isn't a debate about what you "should" do, but but whether a short sword can do slashing damage.

Ray Lewis (6'1, 250lbs) is MUCH larger than the average fighter of the period, and would have counted among the largest of any man at the time.

You mean like the typical 1st level fighter who rarely has a strength below 14?

We assume heights and weights....

While all this may be true, it does not tell us how strong these men actually were. Bantom weight fighters are plenty strong enough to break arms with weapons. I'm sure surf pressed into service would generally fit your description, but men-at-arms and
mercenaries may have been far more capable than any who attempt reenactments.

 

[Sekhmet]

[MENTION=6679551]Arrowhawk[/MENTION] You expect the average fighter to be 6'1" and 250 pounds? You expect the majority of 1st level fighters are heavier than the typical Heavy Weight boxer in modern times?
That is absolutely absurd. Muhammed Ali, one of the greatest heavy weighters to have ever stepped into the ring, boxed between 186 and 236 pounds at 6'3".
Hell, even in modern MMA, the largest men in the Heavy Weight divisions are barely 260 pounds, just slightly larger than your perceived average.

The men I fought in reenactment were typically 6' - 6'5" and between 180-220lbs, taller and larger than men of the time. One man in particular that beat the stuffing out of me had a 48 inch chest. He did not pull his swings, one fully lifted me off the ground (I was 205lbs at the time). I was sore and bruised for a week, but he was still unable to break a bone.
You underestimate the strength of a bone.

A greatsword weighs up to 10lbs, more than twice (sometimes up to three times) as much as a longsword. I do not doubt the greatsword's ability to break a limb (although it is far more likely to slice cleanly through), nor do I doubt a battle axe's.
A battle axe, unlike a sword, focuses the energy of it's swing on a curved, wedged surface and uses your wrist as a fulcrum at the end of the motion.
Swords have no such energy focus, and use a slashing motion to deal damage along the last 6"-8" of the blade primarily.

This is why weapon proficiency is nontransferrable between sword types or axe types.
As the DM, if you wanted to use a short sword as a slashing weapon, I would impose one half penalty for using a lethal weapon in a nonlethal manner (-2) and include a -2 to AC.

 

[Arrowhawk]

[MENTION=6679551]Arrowhawk[/MENTION] You expect the average fighter to be 6'1" and 250 pounds?

In medieval times? No. In D&D, yes on the 6'1" part, not so sure what people put down for weight. But the issue isn't their weight, but their strength. Most 1st level fighters have at least a 16 STR. That would put them in the Ray Lewis strength range and 18 would be closer to the Arnold category.

You underestimate the strength of a bone.

Once again, fighting with padded weapons is not comparable to fighting with real weapons. A bone will break based on the pounds per square inch. The "per square inch" being the most critical measurement considering a padded weapon is what you are using. Perhaps you should try a real sword and a padded one against a piece of wood and let me know what happens.

A greatsword weighs up to 10lbs, more than twice (sometimes up to three times) as much as a longsword. I do not doubt the greatsword's ability to break a limb (although it is far more likely to slice cleanly through), nor do I doubt a battle axe's.

Yes, I think we are in agreement on hacking and slashing being quite different.

Swords have no such energy focus, and use a slashing motion to deal damage along the last 6"-8" of the blade primarily.

As I said, let's test a real sword against a piece of wood and compare that to a padded weapon and let's see what type breakage can be achieved. I have no doubt a longsword will break a clavicle protected by chain mail or cause skull fractures.

This is why weapon proficiency is nontransferrable between sword types or axe types.

This has nothing to do with anything I'm talking about, but it's quite convenient D&D lumps all normal axes and swords under one proficiency.

As the DM, if you wanted to use a short sword as a slashing weapon, I would impose one half penalty for using a lethal weapon in a nonlethal manner (-2) and include a -2 to AC.

YMMV.

 

[Sekhmet]

If you look at carrying capacities, Arnold would have been a 20 strength, looking at his records, and he admitted to using steroids to achieve it. Magnusson has a 22.

The pounds per square inch produced by a slashing weapon such as a longsword is a lot less than you believe it to be. Having used practice swords for the majority of my sword training (wooden swords against bare flesh), they simply do not produce the necessary limits. Yes, you can crack or fracture a bone, but they simply do not break from the average longsword swing, especially when protected by mail.

You'll note weapon focus/specialisation is by specific weapon, not by category, and you'll also note that D&D does not lump all axes or all swords under the same proficiency. Shortswords is a light martial weapon, longswords are martial, and bastard swords are exotic.
Bastard swords being functionally the same as longswords, and really only require additional strength to wield in one hand, not completely new training.

 

[Arrowhawk]

Throughout this discussion you seem unable to differentiate between a wooden or padded sword and a real one with a sharp edge. The force needed to break the collar bone and ribs is substantially less than an arm or leg.

No doubt these type of debates are what make Greatest Warrior a popular show.

 

[Sekhmet]

I think you'll find that the edge of a period wooden practice sword is as edged as a the average sword. They're very easy to break skin with if you don't wear padded armor, and are in fact designed to mimic the properties of an actual sword without the ability to easily kill with.

If you could find some way to focus the pressure on one spot, yes, but swords do not have that capability. The force exerted is spread out over (up to) the last 1/3rd of the blade on the typical swing, which dramatically reduces the PSI delivered. It is further reduced by your target being curved away from the strike and not braced in all cases. Adding chain mail into the equation further reduces the energy transferred by compacting under the blow. Because you cannot follow through, the energy transferable is further affected by reducing the change of velocity to zero.
Mathematically speaking, a long sword of 2-4lbs is not breaking a bone except in perfect conditions, especially using an English fighting style.


Yet another point where you're wrong is that the show is called Deadliest Warrior.

I'm quite done with this conversation. You have been continually incorrect and stubborn regarding evidence and experience, and I doubt at any point will you see reason, even were I to find the exact numbers to support my claim.

I believe, since you brought it up, the Deadliest Warrior television show has used a long sword in several of their episodes, and probably has the numbers down quite well. Perhaps having a third party of professionals tell you that you are wrong will solidify your resolve to fly in the face of science.

Sekh out.

 

[Arrowhawk]

I think you'll find that the edge of a period wooden practice sword is as edged as a the average sword. They're very easy to break skin with if you don't wear padded armor, and are in fact designed to mimic the properties of an actual sword without the ability to easily kill with.

If your wooden swords so perfectly mimic real swords, then why aren't you using real swords? Why because there is a tremendous difference in the damage a sharpened metal edge will do versus a wooden one. To even argue the point is ridiculous.

Mathematically speaking, a long sword of 2-4lbs is not breaking a bone except in perfect conditions, especially using an English fighting style.

Then show me some math instead of your I-do-reenactment-so-that-makes-me-an-expert supposition. How many pounds per square inch does it take to break a clavicle? Do you know without looking it up on the Internet. No, you don't. Do you know exactly how many lbs/in2 a sword can deliver? No, you don't, so you're just running your mouth same as me.

Yet another point where you're wrong is that the show is called Deadliest Warrior.

Oh, well you got me there. Sek 1 Arrowhawk 0. Now you've won some part of the debate. Nevermind your earlier nonsense that slashing and hacking were essentially the same.

I'm quite done with this conversation.

Ah yes, I want the last word and now I'm leaving routine. Vintage BB response.

You have been continually incorrect and stubborn regarding evidence and experience, and I doubt at any point will you see reason, even were I to find the exact numbers to support my claim.

It's clear you got into this thread to try and show-off your knowledge based on your reenactment experience. This is exceedingly evident by your continual use of straw man arguments in an attempt to portray me as debating something I haven't debated. How many irrelevant points did you bring up? I lost count. A short sword can kill somebody with a slashing attack. End of story.

Your experience is with padded weapons and wooden swords. That doesn't make you an expert on real weapons as much as you think it does.

 

[Arrowhawk]

Deadliest Warrior facts.

I believe, since you brought it up, the Deadliest Warrior television show has used a long sword in several of their episodes, and probably has the numbers down quite well. Perhaps having a third party of professionals tell you that you are wrong will solidify your resolve to fly in the face of science.

Sekh out.

You have to love the Internet. I found this on wiki-p.
Deadliest Warrior Episode 17

"Tested against the Persian Immortal's armor, the long sword struck off metal scales with a force of 280 psi, enough to break a rib behind the armor."

EDIT:
Oh, this site is a wealth of info.

PSI needed to fracture a skull is only around 76 PSI. As you can see above, the Longsword generated 280 PSI striking metal armor. Looks like I'm 100% correct about a longsword being able to crack a skull underneath chain mail.

A claymore registered 310 PSI. 55" weapon only weighing 5.5 lbs Only 30 PSI more than a Celtic longsword. Since a Claymore is essentially a greatsword and you already conceded a greatsword could break an arm...

 

[Kynn]

You have to love the Internet. I found this on wiki-p.
Deadliest Warrior Episode 17

"Tested against the Persian Immortal's armor, the long sword struck off metal scales with a force of 280 psi, enough to break a rib behind the armor."

...

Looks like I'm 100% correct about a longsword being able to crack a skull underneath chain mail.

Persian Immortals (from 500 BC) wore chain mail?

Good to know, I guess.

 

[Sekhmet]

You have to love the Internet. I found this on wiki-p.
Deadliest Warrior Episode 17

"Tested against the Persian Immortal's armor, the long sword struck off metal scales with a force of 280 psi, enough to break a rib behind the armor."

EDIT:
Oh, this site is a wealth of info.

PSI needed to fracture a skull is only around 76 PSI. As you can see above, the Longsword generated 280 PSI striking metal armor. Looks like I'm 100% correct about a longsword being able to crack a skull underneath chain mail.

A claymore registered 310 PSI. 55" weapon only weighing 5.5 lbs Only 30 PSI more than a Celtic longsword. Since a Claymore is essentially a greatsword and you already conceded a greatsword could break an arm...

Bronze scale mail =/= steel chain mail.
Hardness and flexibility are important.
The shows prove without doubt that steel chain mail almost perfectly absorbs a long sword, used by an "expert".
The shows also examine the effects of strikes against chain on inflexible, wooden mannequins. Rings in the area surrounding the strikes generally break, but the body underneath is more or less safe from harm.

This is why chain mail has been the most popular form of armor to protect against stabs and slashes since the third century.

This is why the military/riding pick or war hammer was the more effective killing machine against armored opponents.

Spoiler

I call him an "expert" because he wields it incorrectly in attempt to get more momentum out of the swing. Traditionally, a long sword is used with one hand on the base of the blade, "choked up" like a baseball bat.