frankthedm
First Post
So what ststa does this have? 
Top 10 odd D&D weapons
- Thread starter DreadPirateMurphy
- Start date
Its a bladed chain weapon...kinda like a kusarigama or chijiririki...but if he uses it THAT way, he's going to get a +4 to trip himself!
big dummy said:
this one.
And, upon reading further, i'll add:
Dannyalcatraz said:
And that's why i said it depends on your exact required definition/form. If a ~2' straight, two-edged blade on each end, with an overall length of around 6', qualifies, then it existed. If, on the other hand, you want something that was explicitly constructed with 'sword blades' on each end, or with a handle only 6-8" long, or it has to look just like two shortswords/gladii stuck butt-to-butt, then, no, i don't believe it's ever existed. But i'd say the fact that it was considerably more blade than handle--the couple i've seen pictures of looked like just one of the blades was noticably longer than the section of haft--makes it more sword-like than not. But it's just a judgement call. Is the D&D3E doublesword description sufficiently detailed to rule such a construction out?
Last edited:
DreadPirateMurphy
Explorer
Well, some folks obviously know a LOT more about medieval weaponry than me. My original evidence was based largely on prima facie absurdity. It seems like real weapons have a few basic origins:
- tools used for agriculture or hunting and wielded in warfare (daggers, hand axes, shortbows, slings),
- pointy or cutty bits on the end of a long pole, to keep the foe as far from your tender flesh as possible (spears, bill hooks),
- modifications of the first two allowing trained users to be more effective in combat (e.g., swords, longbows, crossbows, battle axes, pikes),
- relatively rare special purpose weapons designed for use by highly trained warriors (sword catchers, chain weapons, etc.).
The last category covers most of the "exotic" weapons listed in D&D. In the real world, you wouldn't see tons of exotic weaponry, because they required a lot of extra training to use properly. They are more common in D&D because of the "kewl" factor, and since it is a game there is no limit on how ridiculous these fantasy weapons can be.
The saving grace is that not everything in D&D is human. There are lots of creatures that have natural armor or damage reduction, superhuman dexterity, multiple arms, etc., and any of these creatures might find it easier to use such weapons. That, at least, is how I would hand-wave the existence of these absurdities as a DM.
Just a thought.
- tools used for agriculture or hunting and wielded in warfare (daggers, hand axes, shortbows, slings),
- pointy or cutty bits on the end of a long pole, to keep the foe as far from your tender flesh as possible (spears, bill hooks),
- modifications of the first two allowing trained users to be more effective in combat (e.g., swords, longbows, crossbows, battle axes, pikes),
- relatively rare special purpose weapons designed for use by highly trained warriors (sword catchers, chain weapons, etc.).
The last category covers most of the "exotic" weapons listed in D&D. In the real world, you wouldn't see tons of exotic weaponry, because they required a lot of extra training to use properly. They are more common in D&D because of the "kewl" factor, and since it is a game there is no limit on how ridiculous these fantasy weapons can be.
The saving grace is that not everything in D&D is human. There are lots of creatures that have natural armor or damage reduction, superhuman dexterity, multiple arms, etc., and any of these creatures might find it easier to use such weapons. That, at least, is how I would hand-wave the existence of these absurdities as a DM.
Just a thought.
lukelightning
First Post
Regarding mercurial weapons: Regardless of if it is physically possible to make a weapon like this, I think having a weight that sloshes around in the weapon would be a severe detriment, not an advantage. Particularly a liquid weight, that would be extremely fluid and dynamic; I doubt anyone could control its position in a fight, and it just breaks my willing suspense of disbelief.
Yeah yeah, fireballs, dragons, whatever. If you want a super hard hitting sword, it should be magical, not some dubious mechanical device.
Yeah yeah, fireballs, dragons, whatever. If you want a super hard hitting sword, it should be magical, not some dubious mechanical device.
Zander
Explorer
Fiore di Liberi was writing around 1409 in (northern?) Italy. It is known that he studied under a German master and thought he fought duels with swordsmen from various European kingdoms. So it's a good bet that the weighted sword was around in about 1409 in Italy and likely elsewhere in Europe as well. While none of these swords survives, another sword type with a mostly blunt blade but no moving weight illustrated next to the weighted one does survive.big dummy said:
The text and illustration are taken from Folio 37 of the Getty Collection's edition of Fiore's monograph.
Hope that helps.
frankthedm said:So what ststa does this have?
I always figured that all that spikiness was just artisitic license. He is wielding a scimitar and a kukri. He has chained the two together for no good reason (maybe so he doesn't loose the kukri if he drops it to get a healing potion).
Agent Oracle
First Post
Just wanted to point out: We're arguing the realisim of a weapon that dosn't eixst, in a dice-based game, with creatures that could not support their own body weight on all fours, let alone on the wing.
That is all.
That is all.
lukelightning
First Post
Agent Oracle said:
Normally people will swallow a big "lie" (dragons, magic, undead, whatever) and choke on a small one (weapon weights, craft rules, weapon types, etc.)
Similar Threads
