Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="sjmiller" data-source="post: 2769091" data-attributes="member: 17262">Sure, but just remember, you asked for it!I am going to keep the math, chemistry, and physics to a minimum here, so some of this will be a bit rough.  A longsword, according to the PH, weighs 4 pounds.  A typical longsword should have an overall length (including grip) of about 4 feet, or 48 inches.  The average width of the sword is 2 inches.  This width is taking into account tapering of the blade at various points.  Because we’re keeping this simple, we’re going to use an average width.  Trust me, there’s little effect on the final numbers.Simple mathematics tells us that the volume of an object can be found using the following formula:V = L x W x HWhere:V = volume in cubic units (in this case, inches)L = length (again, in inches)W = widthH = heightA quick look in a chemistry book shows us that carbon steel, the material that swords are made of, weighs 0.284 pounds per cubic inch (lb/in^3).  Since we know our longsword weighs 4 pounds we can find out how many cubic inches it is by dividing it by 0.284.4 / 0.284 = 14.08 (rounding off, of course), so it is 14.08 cubic inches.Going back to our volume formula, since we know the volume, length, and width, we can find out the height, or thickness of the blade.14.08 = 48 x 2 x H14.08 = 96 x H14.08 / 96 = H0.1467 = HThat comes out to a bit more than 1/8” (actually closer to 1/7”, but that’s hard to show on a ruler).Surprisingly, that is fairly close to what a 14th century longsword would be (48” x 2” x 1/8” = 12 cubic inches = 3.408 lbs).Considering the length of the blade is not uniform, and the guard, grip, and pommel weights are not figured in, that’s pretty good.Let’s take a quick look at a greatsword.  In the 3.0 PH (which I have handy) it weighs 15 pounds.  A nice, typical greatsword should have an overall length of around 60 inches and a blade width of around 2 to 3 inches, we’ll use 2.5.  Using our formula shown above, we get a volume of 52.82 in^3 and a height, or blade thickness, of 0.352 inches.  That’s almost a third of an inch thick.  Take a look at a ruler for a second and look at 1/3 of an inch.  The “greatsword” of those dimensions could best be called a “Great-steel-baton” because it would have no edge whatsoever.A quick check online shows me that the 3.5 SRD has the greatsword at 8 pounds, and several museum websites show a 60” two-handed, or great sword, being about 6 pounds, and about 2.5” wide.  Doing quick math here, the museum pieces should be 0.141” thick.  That makes sense for a weapon of that size (between 1/8 and 1/7 inch thick).  The 3.5 SRD greatsword, using the same length and width, would be 0.188” thick (between 1/6 and 1/5 inch thick).  That’s pretty close to 2/10 (1/5) of an inch thick, a bit thick for that type of weapon, putting it more in the “big steel stick” category.I must say, I am pleasantly surprised that those two weapons are, while heavy, at least moderately close to a real weapon weight.  I noticed that a great many of the two-handed melee weapons are still too heavy, however.  The falchion is rather like a steel brick, but a little research can get the size and weights right.</blockquote>

Verification