Top 10 odd D&D weapons
- Thread starter DreadPirateMurphy
- Start date
Bront said:
2 pounds is within the normal range.
Your friend had a phony "sword like object". You can get them on Ebay now for about $10. You can buy double bladed swords on the internet for that matter.
http://cgi.ebay.com/RONIN-DOUBLE-BL...ryZ43338QQssPageNameZWD1VQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
... that doesn't make it real. You can also buy Klingon and Orc weapons in profusion (I actualy kind of like the orc ones but..) What I'm talking about are historical weapons, an entirely different matter.
Iron isn't any heavier than steel. Bronze is about the same or a little less, (depending on the actualy type of Bronze) For that matter swords were never made of "pure" (or wrought) iron anyway, it wouldn't hold an edge. The difference between steel and iron is a small amount of carbon. Anything between .15% and 2% is essentially steel. (Anything over 2% is cast-iron, which was also never used to make weapons as it was too brittle)
If you really think I'm underestimating the weight of the weapons, why don't you do some research yourself. And like I said, try going through a basic sword drill with a 6 or 8 pound object.
BD
Last edited:
The weapon weights evolved from old AD&D weapon encumbrances, which explicitly did not just include the mass of the weapon (or other object), but also their size, maneuverability, and the general ease in which they could be carried. I think the AD&D encumbrances were generally "heavier," but the principle still applies.DreadPirateMurphy said:
Felix said:
Nice Try. In my 3.5E PhB I see 8 pound greatsword, 8 pound falchion, 8 pound mace, 10 pound flail, 6 pound spear, (9 pound longspear)... plus two bladed weapons, double flails, urgosh and the rest of it.
Of course the weight is only a tiny part of what I was talking about. People in this thread are wondering (as they often do) whats the point of a pole arm, or even a spear?
Also try....
It's just as easy to get the first hit in if you have a dagger, or no weapon at all, vs someone with a sword and shield.
The spiked chain is the ultimate weapon? (too bad they didn't know about that great uber weapon during the Crusades, say, they might have kept the Holy Land)
Swords "slash" only, can't thrust? Similarly you can't cut a throat with a dagger? Or slash with a spear? Or strike with a spear-butt?
Daggers can barely hurt you. If you are a marginally experienced fighter (1st level), a single blow from a dagger can't kill you.
Weapons have no difference in reach (except for that akward 2nd square business), no defensive value, no difference in speed.
Stunning weapons don't work except against low level targets. What is the use of a sap?
It makes most of the weapons pretty useless. There is little point in a wizard getting a staff to defend yourself and fend off enemies, since weapons play no role in defense.
Whats the point of getting a mace unless you are restricted to it by class? It doesn't have any different effect on armor... only I guess against certain monsters immune to cuts or thrusts...
The only way they can actually really differentiate weapons in fact is by damage and critical hits. Thats why they make a dagger practicaly a nuisance weapon when in reality it's every bit as deadly as a sword.
BD
Last edited:
Sledge
First Post
big dummy, please check your references. There were 8 pound swords intended for combat. A well balanced 8 pound sword is usable. Where did you come up with your assumption that no swords were 8 pounds? Is this out of the air, or have you looked in every museum? I'm not talking about garbage replicas, I'm talking about original swords designed only to be used two handed (which is actually due to the length and leverage more than the weight). Even thearma.org admits to this. Let me quote it for you:
www.thearma.org said:
FoxWander
Adventurer
genshou said:
I crunched the numbers myself, but feel free to check me if i'm wrong.
There's no blade thickness mentioned for the sword you linked to but I went and measured one very like it that I have in my living room. My sword had a blade thickness of 0.5 cm. I'd say a channel of half that width shouldn't destroy it's structural integrity (though I'm sure it should have an effect on how easy it might break, probably making mercurial swords, if allowed in your game, easier to sunder). So a channel 0.25 cm wide that goes most of the swords length, say 28 of the swords 30 in. or 71.12 cm., that means 13.96 cubic centimeters (cc). Mercury has a density of 13.53 g/cc so our sword can hold 188.88 grams, or 0.42 lbs., of it in the channel.
In short, you're effectively strapping two boxes of paperclips to your sword and this somehow has the effect of doubling your critical range. :\ Why not just fight with a scythe and get the extra 1 point of minimum damage?
Last edited:
Sledge said:
Sledge,
I'm more than a little familiar with the ARMA, I hosted their 2004 'Southern Knights' training event in New Orleans. The huge 16th century zweihanders or dopplehanders depicted in the article you are quoting from are not portrayed in D&D. Some examples weighed as much as 6-8 lbs, but it is highly contraversial as to whether any swords that heavy were ever used in combat (since many other zweihanders weighed considerably less). Contrary to the opinion in that particular article it's much more likely they were display weapons. The fact is that probably less than 1% of the swords which survive the era weigh anywhere near that wieght.
I have seen and personally handled dozens of antique swords, and I've seen the records on thousands. Weapons even half that heavy are exceeedingly rare. For exaample, in Ewart Oakeshotts Records of the Medieval Sword, which includes swords of all sizes and is still consdiered the definitive overview of medieval swords (including by ARMA), not a single example he describes weighs more than 4 pounds. Very few weigh more than 3.
Since you asked, I came up with my assumption as to sword weight from about 20 years of study of Spathology. If you really want to know, rather than trying to cherry pick some stat of a freak weapon, go on a website like sword forum international, or myarmoury, or the ARMA, and ask them how much swords weighed. Ask them about your eight pound sword.
BD
VirgilCaine
First Post
big dummy said:
Wait, how are you supposed to hurt yourself with armor spikes? You're wearing armor--the spikes go outward.
Sledge
First Post
big dummy there are numerous weapons that are over 7 pounds and balanced for combat. They aren't fancy looking things. They are simple. Since you tell me to go to a website, but dismiss its comments, then I do wonder what inside information you have. I concede a 12 pound sword would be unwieldy, but I do wonder why you insist that a weapon that is described as well balanced and easy to swing must have been for show. Why assume the the weapons in d&d, which were formally called 2 handed swords, are not the same weapons as the 2 handed swords from history?
The approximately 8 pound swords were from the later periods and would not appear very commonly in most of the medieval era. They did range in weight from 6 pounds to 8 pounds. That is a range. Picking the highest number on a range ensures that the weapon is within encumbrance.
Strangely since the term Spathology is a reference to sword forms studied by ARMA and ARMA is only 14 years old, where did you study sword forms in ARMA before there was ARMA?
As requested I checked what ARMA forums said about sword weights. Low and behold, "One handed swords, which come in many varieties, might weight from 2 pounds to 4 pounds, depending."
Right there we have the assertion by other ARMA Spathologists that 2 to 4 pounds for a 1 handed sword is the norm. The fact that 8 pound swords are not in vogue for ARMA is not a reflection of their historical presence.
The approximately 8 pound swords were from the later periods and would not appear very commonly in most of the medieval era. They did range in weight from 6 pounds to 8 pounds. That is a range. Picking the highest number on a range ensures that the weapon is within encumbrance.
Strangely since the term Spathology is a reference to sword forms studied by ARMA and ARMA is only 14 years old, where did you study sword forms in ARMA before there was ARMA?
As requested I checked what ARMA forums said about sword weights. Low and behold, "One handed swords, which come in many varieties, might weight from 2 pounds to 4 pounds, depending."
Right there we have the assertion by other ARMA Spathologists that 2 to 4 pounds for a 1 handed sword is the norm. The fact that 8 pound swords are not in vogue for ARMA is not a reflection of their historical presence.
Sledge said:
Wrong. Unless you are talking about pole arms, you are wrong, there aren't numerous weapons over 7 pounds.
Because
1) I've spent hundreds of hours training with swords, and I know how ridiculous it would be to try to use a weapon anywhere near that weight.
2) Because I have handled real historical weapons and accurate replicas
3) Because I've been to dozens of events with some of the worlds leading experts on swords and I know what they believe, exactly as I do on this subject.
4) Because I've corresponded with many of these same experts for years.
5) Because it's the consensus of every book written on the subject since 1965.
6) Because it's the consensus on any and every repuatable online forum on swords.
Thats a specific type of 16th century sword which was used in pike combat, on battlefields iwth muskets and cannons. They used to specifically include this weapon in OED&D but they dropped it, probably because it was from a later era.
Agian, thats a zweihander. Go look at 100 two-hand or hand and a half swords on myarmoury and figure out the average weight. I dare you.
LOL!!!!
Perhaps not the most widely used term but I can't imagine where you got the idea it was about sword forms in ARMA!!! LOL!!
You are ...er ... misinformed, to be... polite, and you are making a fool of yourserlf. Spathology means nothing more or less than the study of swords. From "Spatha" meaning sword. Just as hoplology meqans the study of weapons.
The only thing it has to do with ARMA is that they also study swords and some (though by no means all) ARMA members probably consider themselves spathologists.
The pioneer in the field is Ewart Oakeshott who invented the modern sword typology
Not in vogue for ARMA? ROFL!!! What is that supposed to mean? ARMA studies historical martial arts period, based on historical weapons, period. They aren't making up their own fashion trends, it's not the SCA (or D&D). Like I said, if you think there is something weird about ARMA in particular, check sword forum online or myarmoury or any reputable source of your own.
You asked them, they told you, 8 lbs is ridiculous. You are going further and further out on a limb. It's sort of symbolic of a whole attitude ... why not just learn some real information instead of insisting on the absurd?
BD
Last edited:
Similar Threads
