Top 10 odd D&D weapons

[big dummy]

Forgive my lousy spelling here, the ankleosaurus (i'm spelling it wrong, i know it) was essentually a walking suit of spiked armor. those rocy outcroppings on it's back came to some nice points when it was alive, and it's tail-club had an obvious functionality.

Ok, if you want to lumber around on all fours like an ankleosaurus (or a porcupine) you can wear the spiked armor. Just dont try any sword fighting please. Combat should be limited to a flail attatched to your butt

BD

 

[big dummy]

The concept is based on real world weapons.

There are spears in Africa, ranging from 4-10' in length, that have a rather interesting design: fully half of their length is composed of blade. The blade has a rather sword-like construction, as much as 2.5" wide where it meets the socket. It can be thrown short distances, but is primarily used as a thrusting & slashing weapons. The longer ones were favored by tribes like the Masai, the shorter ones were created by the Zulu. (My source: WEAPONS An International Encyclopedia from 5000 B.C. to 2000 A.D by the Diagram Group, St. Martin's Press- not a game book, BTW.)

This is a good weapon. It was used full length in the initial confrontation and then actually broken to shorten the weapon into something more like a sword as the battle reached the hand to hand phase and the formations (often quite sophisticated in the case of the Zulu particularly) broke up. It was exported to the Iberian peninsula and was used up through the gunpowder period; for example, the 14th century Catalan Christian foot mercenaries called the Almogàvers wielded this weapon to great effect throughout southern Europe and the Levant.

The Zulus called this an assegei.

BD

 

[big dummy]

My point is that they are weapons that have shifting weight. If you stop the motion of a flail, you 1) run the risk of hitting yourself, 2) have trouble restarting the motion of the flail, leaving yourself open or missing offensive opportunities, and 3) return the mass of the head to the rest state, potentially even below the wielder's grip, and definitely below the optimum point of balance.

There is always a risk of hitting yourself with a flail, but your imagery here does not really jibe with how a real flail actually works. For one thing most historical examples didn't have the real long chain you see in some fantasy depictions.

...this is more like the real thing.

A blade with a tube full of mercury would functionally behave the same way as a flail. (snip)

It's a nicely argued point but you just don't understand how a sword works or how a flail works for that matter. I'd reccomend studying some WMA and doing a little full contact sparring with some realistic weapons, you'll see how out of sinc this all looks...

But if you keep such a blade in motion, the extra mass at the tip could lead to horrendous chopping injuries, similar to those of an axe. That is important.

Sword blades do not cut this way. It's understandable you might think so since D&D has long been supporting this mythology, but it's just not the way it works. In addition to thrusting, Western swords can both slice (or draw cut) like a katanna and 'chop' somewhat like an axe (or more like a meat cleaver) depending of course on the blade geometry of the individual weapon, but the difference between a lethal decapitating cut and a completely in-effective one is about 95% form and maybe 5% power.

Cold Steel Knives makes a great propaganda DVD for their weapons, which they will ship you for free if you call their 800 number. You can watch them cut through entire rib-flanks (bones and all) with gentle sword cuts but perfect form. You can see the guy cut through a phone book with one stroke, or even an entire 5 gallon plastic bottle full of water without knocking it over enough to spill what was in the lower half. It's all form.

On the other hand, if you ever get to handle a real sword, you will notice that you can't even cut through a pool noodle if your form is off (as I learned myself the first time I tried).

It's all edge alignment, correct grip and footwork. Brute strength really isn't a factor beyond a certain basic amount of strength needed to handle the weapon. Thats why swords weighed 2-3 lbs usually instead of 15 like in D&D.

Swords are great weapons- useful against any foe- but axes and flails and similar weapons are actually more useful against heavy armor than swords. Their mass, all concentrated at the point of impact, can dent or penetrate armor or shields that would turn a sword blow- that is one of the reasons they were so popular on the later day battlefields.

True enough, so why not use a mace or a military pick instead of some silly mercury sword thats going to break and spray poisonous mercury mist all over your face the first time you strike anything?

A mercurial sword would be an example of "thinking outside of the box"- attempting to combine the best aspects of the flail and the sword.

Due respect to Gene Wolfe who is a far better author than I'll ever be, the mercurial sword is an example of thinking which belongs in the litter box.

In Genes defense though the weapon is supposed to be just for executions isn't it? It wouldnt' work in combat.

As far as armor spikes go, there are numerous entertainers who routinely wear them as part of their stage costumes, like the guys in GWAR and Slayer. Yes, the ones in GWAR are merely rubber, but Kerry King's are indeed 6" metal spikes...and he hasn't impaled himself yet. Plays some mean guitar while wearing them.

Kerry King doesn't wear them on his whole body, I've only noticed them on his forearms. Even that I guarantee he had years to carefully practice with...

Besides, its not like you have to festoon the armor with spikes. If placed sensibly- one on each knee, a few on the pauldrons, some on the greaves & gauntlets- you won't hurt yourself.

Ok you wear it man, I'll stick to the real thing.

BD

 

[big dummy]

A properly designed sword has a blade no thicker than required. If you put a tube down its center you ruin that design. Not to mention decrease its chance of slicing through a target. Such a tube is not going to be all that strong. One solid block from a shield and that sword blade is going to snap. Spraying you with mercury. Seems like an elaborate method of suicide to me...

If you want a weapon that delivers a high amount of impact energy I have a suggestion, it's called an axe...

Thank you.

BD

 

[genshou]

No one wants to feed me some numbers? Give me the amount of volume (in either percentage or straight cubic cm) that you think the sword I provided a link to could have taken out of the middle without completely destroying the structural integrity.

I think people are overestimating the effect a small, thin channel would have on durability, myself....

 

[Hussar]

You're wrong. Everyone know the most violent modern sport (in North America anyway) is hockey. Those guys always get in fist fights out on the ice and whack each other with the sticks. The worst baseball players do is take steroids...

Though if you really want a violent sport, nothing beats rugby. And the violence isn't confined to the players.

Heh, I've always been partial to lacrosse myself. Now there's some violent sport.

It's all edge alignment, correct grip and footwork. Brute strength really isn't a factor beyond a certain basic amount of strength needed to handle the weapon. Thats why swords weighed 2-3 lbs usually instead of 15 like in D&D.

Umm, Not to be contrary here, but even a greatsword in DnD weighs in at 8 pounds. Heavy, yes, but, not quite as bad as you present. The longsword at 4 pounds is actually fairly accurate.

No one wants to feed me some numbers? Give me the amount of volume (in either percentage or straight cubic cm) that you think the sword I provided a link to could have taken out of the middle without completely destroying the structural integrity.

I think people are overestimating the effect a small, thin channel would have on durability, myself....

However, the effect of a small thin channel would be next to nothing if half filled with mercury. The weight difference between a solid blade and using mercury is simply not enough. It's a question of volume. Like I said, adding a Tsp of mercury is only going to make the blade have wonky balance, not make it hit harder.

 

[genshou]

However, the effect of a small thin channel would be next to nothing if half filled with mercury. The weight difference between a solid blade and using mercury is simply not enough. It's a question of volume. Like I said, adding a Tsp of mercury is only going to make the blade have wonky balance, not make it hit harder.

I'm not trying to make the blade harder, I'm trying to add mass to it. In this case, specifically a shifting mass.

Mercury is denser than iron, so having a channel with mercury in it would actually make the weapon hit harder. The question is whether or not a significant mass increase can be achieved without requiring a channel large enough to ruin the weapon's durability.

 

[Huw]

There was an Asian nation (Vietnam?) that had units of rock-throwers... at least the ammo was cheap.

The Gilbert islanders had armour with a large shield BEHIND the head. The reason? When they fought each other, the women would be behind them throwing stones

 

[big dummy]

I'm not trying to make the blade harder, I'm trying to add mass to it. In this case, specifically a shifting mass.

Mercury is denser than iron, so having a channel with mercury in it would actually make the weapon hit harder. The question is whether or not a significant mass increase can be achieved without requiring a channel large enough to ruin the weapon's durability.

Thats precisely where you are wrong.

Maybe this will help:

http://www.thearma.org/essays/How_Were_Swords_Made.htm

BD

 

[big dummy]

Umm, Not to be contrary here, but even a greatsword in DnD weighs in at 8 pounds. Heavy, yes, but, not quite as bad as you present. The longsword at 4 pounds is actually fairly accurate.

8 pounds is still insane for a sword. Try picking up a six or nine pound maul in a hardware store some time. Even four pounds is questionable for a longsword, though better (I think these numbers were recently improved between 3.0 and 3.5E so somebody must have embarassed them). I've heard of antique longswords as heavy as 4 pounds but it's unsure if they were really battle weapons. They also for that matter had some parade swords (zweihanders) which weighed 10-12 lbs or more but these were never used for fighting or even swung, just carried around processions.

A real longsword or greatsword weighed around 2.5 - 3.5 lbs. The huge 16th century zweihanders could be 4-6 lbs, but these were six foot long swords.

However, the effect of a small thin channel would be next to nothing if half filled with mercury. The weight difference between a solid blade and using mercury is simply not enough. It's a question of volume. Like I said, adding a Tsp of mercury is only going to make the blade have wonky balance, not make it hit harder.

Yeah I think you are right about that. I also don't think you could make the channel without messing up the sword...

BD