D&D General The rapier in D&D

[doctorbadwolf]

Honestly I don't even understand what point you are trying to aggressively prove here.

Are you saying that what is usually called a Rapier by Hema people existed in the 15th century? Or are you arguing that what is usually called a sidesword should just be conflated with 'rapier' under the one term.

I care more about what historians call the thing than what HEMA practitioners call it.

HEMA benefits from clear distinct categories, but the historical fact is that a side sword, small sword, and the swords that exist in between (and alongside) which are longer, are all types of rapier. It’s not conflation, it’s historical accuracy. They are rapiers.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Okay. How about "Rapier, Circa 1490" from the Met, instead?

Rapier - Italian - The Metropolitan Museum of Art

www.metmuseum.org

View attachment 417483

A rapier from the 15th century, directly.

View attachment 417484

Oh, look. The Metropolitan Museum of Art outright states that they were developed in the late 15th century. Or 1400s.

GASP.

Here's an extant example from Germany in 1525.

Rapier - German - The Metropolitan Museum of Art

www.metmuseum.org

Is it POSSIBLE that there were other rapiers in Germany -prior- to 1525 that we just don't have a physical example of?

Shock. Awe. Amazement.

Hey now don’t be extrapolating here we gotta only use terms how a modern reconstructionist martial arts community uses them!

How tiring.

 

[Don Durito]

I care more about what historians call the thing than what HEMA practitioners call it.

HEMA benefits from clear distinct categories, but the historical fact is that a side sword, small sword, and the swords that exist in between (and alongside) which are longer, are all types of rapier. It’s not conflation, it’s historical accuracy. They are rapiers.

A thing is a thing regardless of what it's called. I mean at the time they were all just called "swords".

In my 15th century game I included a weapon "Sidesword/Rapier" because I figured it wasn't necessary to get into the weeds.

But I didn't give it a reach advantage over an arming sword as I would have if it was the longer 16th century weapon.

 

[Don Durito]

Hey now don’t be extrapolating here we gotta only use terms how a modern reconstructionist martial arts community uses them!

How tiring.

I have to admit I find the obnoxiousness here somewhat puzzling.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

A thing is a thing regardless of what it's called.

And the 15th century early rapier is a rapier, regardless of what HEMA calls it.

I mean in my 15th century game I included a weapon "Sidesword/Rapier" because I figured it wasn't necessary to get into the weeds.

But I didn't give it a reach advantage over an arming sword as I would have if it was the longer 16th century weapon.

Okay?

If you go into the early modern era, rapier fencing included both French style very short blades and Spanish style much longer blades. Both were rapiers.

 

[Mannahnin]

I care more about what historians call the thing than what HEMA practitioners call it.

HEMA benefits from clear distinct categories, but the historical fact is that a side sword, small sword, and the swords that exist in between (and alongside) which are longer, are all types of rapier. It’s not conflation, it’s historical accuracy. They are rapiers.

True enough, but this whole conversation is about rapiers in the context of D&D (and other D&D-like games, which might indeed give different stats to a rapier vs a smallsword).

Which requires categorization for purposes of rules, making it in that way more similar to HEMA and its needs than to a historical discussion of what a given smith called a particular sword they made in a particular year.

 

[pawsplay]

Okay. How about "Rapier, Circa 1490" from the Met, instead?

Yep, that's a transitional weapon from 1490 Italy. So, not 1440, not Germany, and not a rapier.

As I noted above, the terminology comes from Spain and Italy ("dress sword") and predates the rapier proper. That's a spada de lato. And I'm not just being picky, that thing is purely an arming sword, a cut and thrust sword with no basket or wire hilt, just turned quillions. That is a rapier only in a general and non-strict sense, and is characteristic of sword evolution which happened much, much earlier in Spain and Italy than Germany. 15th century German fencing looked like this:

That's from Talhoffer's codex, by the way. A quick jog over to Wikipedia indicates this work was authored from 1443 to 1467, or so.

Germany, by the way, was invented conceptually in 1815, and actually in 1871.

 

[pawsplay]

Obviously real world sword dimensions are highly variable and categorization can be a bit murky about the edges, especially in transitional periods as one common form is being replaced by another, but D&D calling a single handed blade a longsword has been a bit of a meme and lighthearted complaint among sword nerds for decades. OSR game 5 Torches Deep calls its single handed swords "arming swords" and its two handed swords "longswords".

AD&D actually uses the term "long sword," two words, which in Shakespeare's time sometimes did refer to a general one-handed sword. Basic D&D just called it a "sword," or when clarity was needed, "sword, normal." The bastard sword was correctly described in both games; it was starting with 3e that D&D started officially not quite understanding what a bastard sword was.

 

[SkidAce]

Spoken like someone who never encountered a pissed off rooster.

Thanks for the recall of childhood trauma...

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yep, that's a transitional weapon from 1490 Italy. So, not 1440, not Germany, and not a rapier.

As I noted above, the terminology comes from Spain and Italy ("dress sword") and predates the rapier proper. That's a spada de lato. And I'm not just being picky, that thing is purely an arming sword, a cut and thrust sword with no basket or wire hilt, just turned quillions. That is a rapier only in a general and non-strict sense, and is characteristic of sword evolution which happened much, much earlier in Spain and Italy than Germany. 15th century German fencing looked like this:

View attachment 417510

That's from Talhoffer's codex, by the way. A quick jog over to Wikipedia indicates this work was authored from 1443 to 1467, or so.

Germany, by the way, was invented conceptually in 1815, and actually in 1871.

You seem to have missed the word “instead” in the text you quoted. You’re arguing against an argument that isn’t being made in the post you quoted.

True enough, but this whole conversation is about rapiers in the context of D&D (and other D&D-like games, which might indeed give different stats to a rapier vs a smallsword).

It might, or it might use “broadsword” to mean literally any onehanded sword that isn’t swishy pokey. D&D is weird like that.

However, the short sword sitting alongside the rapier kinda suggests that a small sword could use either stats depending on what the player wants to do. 5e just isn’t that precise.

Which requires categorization for purposes of rules, making it in that way more similar to HEMA and its needs than to a historical discussion of what a given smith called a particular sword they made in a particular year.

If HEMA was brought up in that context specifically rather than as if it disproved what was suggested by historians, I wouldn’t have anything to say about HEMA in this thread. HEMA is cool. But regardless of what HEMA calls things, the rapier existed in the mid 15th century.