Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Arrowhawk" data-source="post: 5817112" data-attributes="member: 6679551">None of that has been debated.&nbsp; Actually it doesn't.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; I thin edge can increase the amount of force experienced by a bone by an order of magnitude.&nbsp;&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; Is it better than nothing.&nbsp; Definitely.&nbsp; Whether that's true or not, if filled with above average fighters.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Strength ratings off the human scale at higher levels.&nbsp; I also don't know too many people who put down 5'8&quot; for the fighter height.&nbsp; So since we are talking about D&amp;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.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; 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</blockquote>I have done no such thing.&nbsp; This isn't a debate about what you &quot;should&quot; do, but but whether a short sword can do slashing damage.&nbsp;&nbsp;You mean like the typical 1st level fighter who rarely has a strength below 14?&nbsp;While all this may be true, it does not tell us how strong these men actually were.&nbsp; Bantom weight fighters are plenty strong enough to break arms with weapons.&nbsp; I'm sure surf pressed into service would generally fit your description, but men-at-arms and &nbsp;mercenaries may have been far more capable than any who attempt reenactments.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE="Arrowhawk, post: 5817112, member: 6679551"] None of that has been debated. 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. 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. 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. You mean like the typical 1st level fighter who rarely has a strength below 14? 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification