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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Storyteller01" data-source="post: 1948398" data-attributes="member: 20931">Between an inch to 1 1/2", depending on the maker, wood used, etc. japanese white oak works well. As for the name, couldn't tell ya!As for power output (more anecdotal stuff), have a friend who's working on a masters in cultural anthropolgy, with a focus on weapons developement and function. Per him, japan didn't develope the armor because 1)steel was at a premium, and 2) the weather was not conductive to that type of dress. You'd be dead from heat stroke in a matter of minutes if you wore that armor during the summer, especially in the heat of battle. reportedly, some wore silk under armor to give protection against arrows. Something about the fibers prevented penetration. haven't talked to him in a while, so I can't say much on other Asian cultures, but I would imagine a similar situation given the documented weather during the Vietnam conflict. They did use the laquered wood and steel plates (the steel was folded in the same manner as the katana, but not as often) for this reason. Also remember the different fighting styles, and the fact that European battle tactics started moving towards mobility over protection before the advent of the gun. Armor was getting too easy to penetrate.On the other side, Europen weaponry tended to develope with the need for penetrating said armor. Tended toward either peircing or bashing (hammers and axes generally had a pick or claw on the other end, and even the swords possessed a straighter blade).Factiod for you: the katana actually has a harder time pentrating leather and some woods. Same goes for the folded steel. Has something to do with the way the organic fibers cross randomly, rather than going with a particular grain (same reason why an axe works best when cutting with the grain). Japan didn't wear much armor, but what they did wear was effective for their combat environment. This tends to add to the need for greater power. Also, a slicing weapon requires that you power through muscle and bone to hit a vital area. Not an easy task (the practice with the bamboo was used because bamboo naturally has a density consistent with human bone). Both weapons require the neccesary power AFTER they pentrate the protection. Both styles tended towrd aiming at vulnerable areas (japanese actually have a technique that flips the armored 'skirt' up, nailing the femorial artery in the same motion).I can understand the need for decreased damage (mass does count for something, even if not as much as velocity), but give that human cultures start teaching weapons use by age five, and start seeing effective use at age 13 (roughly the same strength as said small races, and hands still have a bit of growing to do. Miamato Musashi [butchered the spelling] reportedly killed in his first duel at age 13.). Given, halflings and gnomes aren't the size of a 13 year old, but strength is comparable. There was a power study on kendo students. I think they sadi that said students were putting something close to a 1/2 ton in power through their rear foot, but I could be mistaken. (damn good, given that its the leg/body surge that provides the greatest power, and said students tend to weigh in at 150 to 180).</blockquote>

Verification