Seperating your Epees from your Rapiers?

[Three_Haligonians]

Well, the thread about swords got me thinking about, well, swords. Now, I know I'm not as experienced as many of you out there, so I want your opinions on this. As far as I can tell, D&D sort of combines the rapier, epee, foil and all "fencing type weapons" (in case I'm missing some) into the standard rapier. Keeping game balance in mind, how would you go about seperating them into more distinct D&D weapons. For instance (dear God, please correct me if I'm wrong!) as far as I remember, the epee is sharp on one side, and dull on the other, which allows for some pretty cool grapples of the sword itself. How you would work that into the weapon discription...beyond me. However, what are your thoughts on these wonderful light weapons? Feel free to add some comments about the history of the sword and its unique ablility in combat.

Thanks everyone!

T from Three Haligonians

 

[diaglo]

play Chainmail it is much simpler. all weapons do d6 hp of damage. and all classes get d6 hp.

edit: you forgot the saber

 

[DanMcS]

Well, the thread about swords got me thinking about, well, swords. Now, I know I'm not as experienced as many of you out there, so I want your opinions on this. As far as I can tell, D&D sort of combines the rapier, epee, foil and all "fencing type weapons" (in case I'm missing some) into the standard rapier. Keeping game balance in mind, how would you go about seperating them into more distinct D&D weapons. For instance (dear God, please correct me if I'm wrong!) as far as I remember, the epee is sharp on one side, and dull on the other, which allows for some pretty cool grapples of the sword itself. How you would work that into the weapon discription...beyond me. However, what are your thoughts on these wonderful light weapons? Feel free to add some comments about the history of the sword and its unique ablility in combat.

Epee, fencing sabre, and foil are all training weapons. They would do subdual. All are finessable; all are blunt. I'd give an epee about a d3 subdual, and a foil about d2; the epees always seemed to be much thicker, I'd suppose you could poke harder with one. A sabre probably also d2.

Epees and foils are stabbing weapons exclusively, you score with the tip. Legal foil targets are mainly the mask and body. Legal epee targets the whole body. Sabres are slashing; you are supposed to score with the front of the blade, and the back 1/3 of the blade nearest the tip. With electronic scoring, the whole blade is electrified, so you can really score with all of the blade.

None of the sport-fencing weapons used in modern times would have any worth as a weapon to be used in D&D vs monsters or an armed opponent. If you were facing an unarmed commoner and had removed the safety tip from the epee and sharpened it, I'd allow it as a d3 piercing weapon.

A rapier represents any kind of "real" fencing stabbing sword you would want. If you want a "real" sabre, use the rapier stats and call it slashing instead of piercing. That's as good as it's going to get, probably.

 

[Driddle]

As has been noted, sport epees are not edged weapons, nor are foils. And although they are considered "training" weapons in this day and age, the truth is that a skilled fencer -- and a sharpened weapon tip instead of a blunt scoring tip -- could do a lot more piercing damage than D&D's sense of "subdual."

The biggest problems with a translation of current epees to rapiers of yore are those of manufacture and application. In the first case, current epees are made to be (compared with rapiers) very, very flexible. Even more so with foils. And because they're supposed to be used in a "safe" competition environment, they're not supposed to break easily from proper thrust attacks. I doubt our sports weapons could have been manufactured way back then with today's standards of use.

But in the latter matter (that of application), anyone using a sport epee or foil in serious combat would necessarily be fighting in a style unlike anything we're used to imagining in a historic setting. Simply put, a sport blade couldn't stand up very well to hard parries from anything other than another sport blade. *Perhaps* it could stand up to a thin rapier, or be wielded with enough finesse to avoid the impact of blade-to-blade strikes (i.e. beat-attacks). If you've ever seen high-level athletes in foil competition, you know that many of their attacks are very whip-like, or what's referred to as "flick" attacks, at inobvious target zones. Other attacks are comprised of various combinations of straight lunges and beat-attacks (which displace the opponent's blade *just enough* to hit him before he can hit you).

If an epeeist or foilist tried to adapt his weapons skills to mortal combat in a fantasy setting, he'd absolutely positively have to rely on a great sense of distance and quicker tempo than his heavy-handed opponent. He *could* be deadly, but only if he picked his enemy correctly, and picked his opportunities.

Saber, the third sport weapon, is used for piercing and cutting attacks. Many of the same perspectives would apply there as well (DISTANCE!) but because of the parries you learn with saber, it would be difficult to train yourself out of blade-to-blade strikes.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Epee, fencing sabre, and foil are all training weapons. They would do subdual. All are finessable; all are blunt. I'd give an epee about a d3 subdual, and a foil about d2; the epees always seemed to be much thicker, I'd suppose you could poke harder with one. A sabre probably also d2.

Not an expert, but did fence for a semester in college. The epee has a thicker, triangular cross-section as opposed to the rapier's thin round one. The epee is much less flexible. Sabre is heavier than even the epee, but flat, thin and flexible; I'd give it a d3 as well (again, for the sporting version.)

Legal epee targets the whole body.

This is also true of the sabre. The logic behind the scoring system is based on the type of wound the true, combat version of the weapon would make. A rapier poke to the arm or leg may hurt, but won't neccessarily disable the limb, so only torso and head shots count. A bigger poke with an epee or slash from a saber will probably impair the limb significantly, so hits anywhere score in the sport.

If you want a "real" sabre, use the rapier stats and call it slashing instead of piercing.

Yeah, and I would probably allow Weapon Finesse to be used with it as well. One fencer I had a match with kept getting through my guard by actually snapping his wrist so the sabre flexed over mine like a whip when I blocked. After the match, we were both impressed by the amount of bruising he had done to my shoulder even through the heavy fencing jacket.

 

[Drifter Bob]

Hi, I'm sorry to sound preachy, but you guys should really know this. The various sport fencing swords (epee, foil, and saber) are all essentially developments of the 18th century smallsword, which is very much a lethal weapon. Smallswords look nearly identical to an epee or a foil, and are the same size (around 34-36" in total length0 except that the blades are stiffer, and of course, pointed. A thrust with a smallsword could kill very, very quickly and easily, two inches through the rib cage and you are dead.

Here are pics of smallswords:

http://www.myarmoury.com/view.html?reviews/aa_ss_a.jpg
http://www.osograndeknives.com/Cold Steel/Images/CS-88SMS.jpg
http://www.armor.com/2000/catalog/images/069.jpg

Smallswords were indeed considered too fragile to use against heavier military weapons, but there was another development which was popular into the 19th century, call the colichemarde, which was like a smallsword except that it has a heavier forte (the first foot or so of blade) which could be used to parry heavier weapons.

Here are colichemardes:

http://www.myarmoury.com/view.html?reviews/ggg_ss1.jpg
http://www.bearnes.co.uk/Catalogues/SE231001/LOT 560.JPG

The rapier, by contrast, is a very large weapon, usualy close to four feet long, and fairly heavy. Early transitional rapiers, weapons like sideswords, did have blade presense and could cut effectively.

Sideswords / transitional rapiers

http://www.myarmoury.com/albums/albums/userpics/10002/normal_BrownSidesword_01.jpg
http://www.armor.com/2000/catalog/images/121.jpg
http://www.myarmoury.com/view.html?reviews/mrl_candt1.jpg

Rapiers

http://www.myarmoury.com/view.html?reviews/aa_mil_a.jpg
http://www.armor.com/2000/catalog/images/163.jpg
http://www.armor.com/2000/catalog/images/162.jpg
http://www.armor.com/2000/catalog/images/111.jpg

Rapiers are very different weapons from smallswords, they rely more on reach than pure agility, and do require some strength to wield effectively.

The "rapier" in D&D is often depicted like a light cavalry saber, and seems to have the stats of something like a smallsword.

DB

 

[Nasma]

The way that i've always understood it is that the foil was the training weapon, while the epee was designed to be more like actual combat. Hence the existence of right of way in foil, in order to force you to do the 'correct' moves.

 

[Dogbrain]

Not an expert, but did fence for a semester in college. The epee has a thicker, triangular cross-section as opposed to the rapier's thin round one.

With all due respect, you don't know dink about rapiers, and this is obvious. No rapier ever made has a "round" cross-section, and no rapier ever made was ever thinner than any modern sport epee. The "double wide" theatrical epee has a lighter blade than did most rapiers.

The epee is much less flexible.

Less flexible than what? A modern sport epee is a piece of cooked spaghetti compared to a real rapier.

A rapier poke to the arm or leg may hurt, but won't neccessarily disable the limb, so only torso and head shots count.

More total rubbish. Sport epees are invariably significantly lighter and less stout than any rapier was. The rules for FOIL to which you refer are not about rapier, they are adopted from the principles of SMALLSWORD.

A bigger poke with an epee or slash from a saber will probably impair the limb significantly, so hits anywhere score in the sport.

Bigger poke? The epee is a lighter version of the 19th-century French dueling sword, which is lighter than any rapier. As for the modern sport sabre, it has too little mass to disable a limb with a single cut.

One fencer I had a match with kept getting through my guard by actually snapping his wrist so the sabre flexed over mine like a whip when I blocked.

Anything that floppy couldn't do more than a surface wound.

 

[Dogbrain]

This [that the whole body is a target] is also true of the sabre.

False. The legs are not a permitted target for sabre. And to forestall ignorant claims, it is NOT because of some sort of silly "cavalry" schtick. When wrist-breakers were used by cavalry, they practiced parries specifically to protect the legs and the horse. The "no legs" rule was instituted around 1914 as a compromise. The French rules permitted whole body sabre target but excluded the arms from foil. The Italians excluded the legs but permitted the arms to be a target for foil. The French target was adopted for foil and the Italian target for sabre, purely as a SPORT convention.

 

[Dogbrain]

Hi, I'm sorry to sound preachy, but you guys should really know this. The various sport fencing swords (epee, foil, and saber) are all essentially developments of the 18th century smallsword, which is very much a lethal weapon.

No. The foil and epee are developments from the 19th-century French epee du combat (dueling sword), which was significantly longer (4-6 inches) than a typical smallsword.

The foil was specifically and exclusively for teaching. Epees began as fully functional dueling swords, except that a button was run through to stop penetration beyond a half inch. Once in a while, this button could come off during friendly bouts, with tragic results. To prevent this, swords were made with blades that had a point d'arret--the button was integral with the blade. This "thumbtack point" was then replaced by a three-prong point d'arret then replaced with a blunt point covered by rubber or a similar substance. From that point, onwards, epees became successively, thinner, lighter, and more flexible.

The sabre had nothing at all to do with the smallsword. In Italy and Hungary (the Austro-Hungarian Empire and its dependents, essentially), it became popular to duel with cutting swords. Since duels were not a matter of charge hard, hack hard, wheel about and do again, dueling sabres became significantly lighter than military sabres. The fencing sabre is an even lighter descendent of the practice versions of this weapon.

Smallswords look nearly identical to an epee or a foil, and are the same size (around 34-36" in total length) except that the blades are stiffer, and of course, pointed.

Smallswords were a few inches shorter--the style of combat was different, too. It's almost nose-to-nose when compared to the later French and Italian schools.

The rapier, by contrast, is a very large weapon, usualy close to four feet long, and fairly heavy. Early transitional rapiers, weapons like sideswords, did have blade presense and could cut effectively.

That depends upon the specific era. Early on, they tended to be shorter, and at the end of the era, they were also shorter. You err in grouping transitional rapiers with the so-called "sidesword" (a horrid neologism that was invented in the past three to five years and never used historically). Transitional rapiers were at the end of the rapier era--they were transiting into smallswords.