Longswords for Halflings in SRD?

[Storyteller01]

But on average? The average Medium longsword would have a thicker hilt than the average Small greatsword; the chunkiest Medium longsword would have a thicker hilt than the chunkiest Small greatsword; the slimmest Medium longsword would have a thicker hilt than the slimmest Small greatsword?

-Hyp.

No it wouldn't, if it's expected to withstand impact from a creature of near equivalent power.
They block the same attacks that deliver the same impact. The requirements will also be the same.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Children are taught to wield knives made for adults at a young age even today. A twelve year old has learned to use a kitchen knife long before they are that age.

I've been cooking since I was 8 years old- I GUARANTEE you that the grip I have on my Hinkels now is FAR superior to the one I had 30 years ago.

Take two european two-handed swords, one from germany and the other from england. Will they both have the exact same dimensions. Will a fighter from either country suffer a -2 penalty because the blade isn't balanced for his nationality?

Their dimensions probably would differ- Germans favored the flamberge design for a long time- and its possible that the swordsmen would suffer difficulties with the varied designs.

However, you're still talking about 2 weapons that, in D&D terms, would be identical AND made to the scale of their wielders.

A better comparison would occur if someone could post the dimensions of a German zweihander and then calculate the changes (to its various physical dimensions, mass, blade cross section, etc.) if it were shrunk in all dimensions down to the size of a longsword...then compared THAT to a typical German longsword.

But I don't do that kind of math.

Re: Storyteller's response to H-Smurf's post:

No it wouldn't, if it's expected to withstand impact from a creature of near equivalent power.
They block the same attacks that deliver the same impact. The requirements will also be the same.

I'm with H-Smurf. The key isn't what its impact its expected to withstand (more a measure of armor than a weapon, anyway), its what kind of energy the wielder will be expected to exert while wielding it for a given amount of time. A smaller wielder will demand a less-massive weapon. He will have different leverege.

A greatsword isn't just a longer longsword- its proportions and features are different. A typical 2hander will have a longer hilt, as well as a MUCH larger ricasso...possibly even quillions above the ricasso-which longswords generally lack. Its blade will probably have a thicker cross-section- many were made with a single-diamond cross-section.

 

[pawsplay]

A typical longsword's grip is around, oh, 3/4" to 1". If it's a flat, it might be 1 1/2" on one side. A greatsword's grip... is the same.

Now, a sword designed for a ten foot tall person is more than 50% larger. So their longsword would have a hilt about 1 1/2" round to about 1 5/8". A flat might be over two inches across.

It would be like wielding a rolling pin as the hilt of a sword. A small rolling pin, to be sure, but a rolling pin. It would also have about two pounds of weight just in the hilt, making it pretty good for power walking. Imagine sticking a sword blade on the end of a Maglight and trying to wield that.

I am willing to some allowances. I've wielded boffers longer than my shoulder height, daggers with 3" pommels, five pound swords, and a 4 1/2 foot long rapier. However. Wielding a dagger with a hilt that resembles the wrong end of a baseball bat is going to present some serious problems.

The only reason not to consider outsized weapons as automatically improvised weapons is that, first of all, some things are going to be sized similar (a quarterstaff would lack both girth and length relative to a larger wieldier to have about the same properties, the hilt of an elf's shortsword might not be that much larger than the hilt of a goblin's greatsword) and some weapons can be wielded in alternative ways (a large club or quarterstaff could be held like a sledge, a rapier wielded in two hands could be hefted and wielded point down like a greatsword).

 

[Storyteller01]

Why? Because its not built for his hand's smaller grip. While a 5'7" adult like myself can easily grip such a weapon- indeed, my hand would completely envelop the grip and possibly overlap some- someone who is about a child's size might just barely be able to grip it. Without a doubt, that person's grip on that weapon would not be as sure as my own.

Rethink that statement. The weapon is 1/4 " (inch) wide by 3/8" high. You have to maintain a light grip because you can't hold this weapon without crowding your fingures. A new born can grip your finger, which isn't much bigger than these dimensions. A small creature with half the size of a human hand (to be conservative) will have a problem gripping this why?

And if you handed it to someone the size of Andre the Giant (who would still be considered size M, BTW), the whole weapon would fairly dissapear in his hands.

We agreed on this, but he barely qualifies.

Holding != Wielding. I've never seen a child learning weapons training with a full-sized weapon.

Then you should keep looking. Kids get excited when you bring out the wooden tantos in a martials arts class.

Re: Epee & Saber. Those who learn both weapons are learning 2 different weapons that are of appropriate size & balance to them.

Regardless, they're learning a weapon with a stadard handle vs a weapon with a pistol grip. Two completely diferent animals, and they overcome this without a problem. If they can do this, do you think a slightly smaller dagger handle will bother them?

If you look at the statistics for historical weapons, the differences are smaller than you'd think. A short-sword might weigh as much as 3 pounds, a rapier between 3-4 lbs, a longsword 3.5 to 4.5 pounds, and a 2-hander rarely weighs more than 6.

And a human overcomes all of these weight differences without penalty. Why would a creature of similar strength be suffering penalties?

You get outside those weights, you introduce all kinds of problems. There is an example of a nearly 8lb ceremonial 2 hander in Europe that is completely unwieldy, even by largeish persons who are proficient in the weapon- its blade flexes so much its looks like a comma when the blade is held "level." A smaller 7lb 2 hander (same length, narrower blade-point) in the same museum (intended for use) has a blade with significant flex, but its INCHES less than its ceremonial cousin.

Small creatures have an equivalent strength to humans. You're saying that a critter that can carry an average of 60 lb for 8 hours without to much effort is going to be thrown off by 3-4 lbs?

Going the other direction, you simply scale things down and you change some of the mechanical properties of the weapons. Take a look at one of the various Oakeshott sites- there are reasons why a shortsword has a different blade shape from a longsword.

Yes, and there's a reason a machete is a different shape. And their the same length, with the machete being slightly lighter.

Or, in other words, despite being curved blades, a Wazikashi is not a Katana is not a No-Daichi, and wouldn't perform optimally if used by someone for whom they were not to scale.

Difine optimal scale. A japanese national in WWII would have a blade 27" long. My optimal length is 30" to 31". I own a 27" blade, and have no problems wielding it. It's actually easier to use than the 30" training blade.

Am I somehow suffering penalties for having a blade 3" to 4" too short and a 1/4 lb lighter that what's optimal? A small hafling using a Medium shortsword isn't facing nearly so much a difference.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If Storyteller01 contends that a halfling smith looking to design a Small greatsword would come up with something indistinguishable from a Medium longsword, I don't see how further discussion on my part will have any point... because I simply can't agree with that, and it's fundamental to everything else that follows.

-Hyp.

 

[pawsplay]

I think the point is that despite the obvious differences between a shortsword, longsword, and greatsword, in some respects, they are all on the same scale. They all weigh between, say, 2 and 6 pounds, all have grips somewhere between 1/2" and 1" thick, and so forth. A miniature sword is a completely different creature.

There are border cases where a weapon could be gripped, such as a stiletto. Again, it is the GM's prerogative to allow it on a per-case basis. However, I think the vast majority of human shortswords (90% +) would be unwieldy to the vast majority of halflings. And certainly, a human's rapier with a wire hilt, a finger guard, a ball hilt, an extended pommel, and double quillions would be all but unusable to a halfling. He would be better off trying to fight with a chair.

 

[Storyteller01]

I've been cooking since I was 8 years old- I GUARANTEE you that the grip I have on my Hinkels now is FAR superior to the one I had 30 years ago.

Agreed. Now figure how easily that would have been at 8 if you had the str and experience you have now.

Their dimensions probably would differ- Germans favored the flamberge design for a long time- and its possible that the swordsmen would suffer difficulties with the varied designs.

However, you're still talking about 2 weapons that, in D&D terms, would be identical AND made to the scale of their wielders.

But you're saying that it's differences similar to these that cause small creatures to suffer a penalty.

A better comparison would occur if someone could post the dimensions of a German zweihander and then calculate the changes (to its various physical dimensions, mass, blade cross section, etc.) if it were shrunk in all dimensions down to the size of a longsword...then compared THAT to a typical German longsword.

It wouldn't be accurate. Small creatures weapons are expected to withstand the same impacts and regars of their medium counterparts. Many tolerances (width of the handguards, ratio of grip to tang, ratio to grip and blade length, etc) will remain the same for similarly sized weapons.

I'm with H-Smurf. The key isn't what its impact its expected to withstand (more a measure of armor than a weapon, anyway), its what kind of energy the wielder will be expected to exert while wielding it for a given amount of time. A smaller wielder will demand a less-massive weapon. He will have different leverege.

Humans barely wield any weapon with weight as it is. A longsword isn't any lighter not because we can't make it that way, but because the mass is required somewhere in a strike to create optimal damage. A weapon will need to be the same weight to do similar damage.

A greatsword isn't just a longer longsword- its proportions and features are different. A typical 2hander will have a longer hilt, as well as a MUCH larger ricasso...possibly even quillions above the ricasso-which longswords generally lack. Its blade will probably have a thicker cross-section- many were made with a single-diamond cross-section.

And a Small longsword won't simply be a scaled down longsword. It will be dealing with situations and forces that a blade of similar size will be dealing with, and have a similar construstion.

 

[Storyteller01]

If Storyteller01 contends that a halfling smith looking to design a Small greatsword would come up with something indistinguishable from a Medium longsword, I don't see how further discussion on my part will have any point... because I simply can't agree with that, and it's fundamental to everything else that follows.

-Hyp.

I didn't say they would be indistinguishable, but they wouldn't be so different as to permanently apply a penaly that are higher than a temporary 1st level spell.


If the chimp in the video wielded a weapon, would a thinner hilt be able to take that impact?

 

[Hypersmurf]

I didn't say they would be indistinguishable, but they wouldn't be so different as to permanently apply a penaly that are higher than a temporary 1st level spell.

But that the sizes of the hilts would be no different, despite relative hand sizes etc.

I can't agree with that, and that's where it all hinges.

-Hyp.

 

[Storyteller01]

But that the sizes of the hilts would be no different, despite relative hand sizes etc.

I can't agree with that, and that's where it all hinges.

-Hyp.

I don't argee that they would only be half the size, or 1/2" wide, since the hilt re-enforces the blade of near identical weight to it's medium counterpart (Small lonsword to Medium shortsword, for example). This requires the same size tang, some of which are nearly 1/2" on there own.

And I don't agree that the hilt grip would be much shorter, since the leverage helps balance the blade weight. Halfings would be putting some pretty hefty pommels on similar blades with shorter handles, and that's as likely as not to be more restrictive than simply using a longer grip.