For the next person, 17th century Indian Persian martial ax:
Re: Weapon Stats Game
Posted: 17 Aug 2017, 02:34
by thirtythr33
Benedict wrote:16th century italian short sword:
Blade Heavy
Am I the one who's gone crazy? How on earth are you and Agamemnon calling things like this Blade Heavy?
Benedict wrote:17th century Indian Persian martial ax
Spear Head
Axe Head
Medium
Hefty
4c/2p Medium, 2h, Hook r4
And for the next person, a tetsubo (aka kanabo):
Re: Weapon Stats Game
Posted: 23 Aug 2017, 12:25
by Benedict
thirtythr33 wrote:
Benedict wrote:17th century Indian Persian martial ax
4c/2p Medium, 2h, Hook r4
No ornament costs?
thirtythr33 wrote:And for the next person, a tetsubo (aka kanabo)
Base Cost r1; Base DR 0b/0b
Head (top): none
Head (side): Mace (Cost+1, 1b/0b; Crushing)
Long: (+1/+1 DR, 2h)
Features
Hefty (Cost+1, +1 Swing, -1 Thrust, 2h)
Tetsubo: DR 3b/0b; Reach Long; Cost r3; Notes 2h, Crushing
As for the next person, a mid 16th century decorated sabre: In case anyone is wondering, that hilt is made of a single piece of coral.
Re: Weapon Stats Game
Posted: 08 Sep 2017, 07:25
by FortPwnall
Benedict wrote:
As for the next person, a mid 16th century decorated sabre In case anyone is wondering, that hilt is made of a single piece of coral.
Basic cost r2
Geometry
Single edged (1c / 0p)
Length
Medium
Taper
Blade-heavy (+1 swing), cost+1
Features
Curved (-1 thrust)
Decorations
Noble x3 (cost +4) Made with exotic material (coral), sculpted grip and pommel, Minor gold trimming
Final
Sabre; DR 2c/-1p; Medium reach; Cost r7; Curved
Alright, for the next person, German Landsknechte Flamberge Sword (I am still a newb as far as knowledge of historical weaponry is concerned. I don't know how historically accurate this is, but the site I got it from claims that it is)
FortPwnall wrote:Alright, for the next person, German Landsknechte Flamberge Sword (I am still a newb as far as knowledge of historical weaponry is concerned. I don't know how historically accurate this is, but the site I got it from claims that it is)
Feature: Wave (weapon gains Wave trait - like "weapon increases Draw Cut damage bonus from +1DR to +2DR"?)
Hilt Upgrades: None
Wealthy Customizations: Sculptural elements (Cost +1)
Flamberge: 2c/2p, Ext, r6, 2h
Maybe Cost +1 for Wave. Maybe entirely different features for this. Agamemnon promised to include this feature in a future revision.
Next:
Re: Weapon Stats Game
Posted: 08 Sep 2017, 10:40
by FortPwnall
EinBein wrote:
That's mine!
Do you mean yours for making stats in this game, or yours as in you actually own a replica?
EinBein wrote:
Feature: Wave (weapon gains Wave trait - like "weapon increases Draw Cut damage bonus from +1DR to +2DR"?)
Maybe Cost +1 for Wave. Maybe entirely different features for this. Agamemnon promised to include this feature in a future revision.
Hmmm... I'm looking at this further. Wikipedia says:
When parrying with such a sword, unpleasant vibrations may be transmitted into the attacker's blade. These vibrations cause the blades to slow contact with each other because additional friction is encountered with each wave.
The arma thread includes speculation that the shape was intended for decreasing drag!
It seems that this is a feature that would need to be more carefully researched first before one could really say what advantages or disadvantages it would give.
At the very least, it is accepted that the sword would be harder to make. The safest rule (for the moment?) would probably be to just consider it an expensive aesthetic modification, until actual advantage can be determined.
Re: Weapon Stats Game
Posted: 08 Sep 2017, 11:24
by thirtythr33
That looks like a Großes Messer to me.
Bladed weapon. r2
Single Edged. 1/0
Medium Length.
Blade Heavy. 2/0 r3
Bastard Hilt.
2c / 0p Medium 1.5h r3
For the next person:
FortPwnall wrote:Do you mean yours for making stats in this game, or yours as in you actually own a replica?
His character Gregor is using a Flamberge in our ongoing game The Floating City on the forums here.
FortPwnall wrote:At the very least, it is accepted that the sword would be harder to make. The safest rule (for the moment?) would probably be to just consider it an expensive aesthetic modification, until actual advantage can be determined.
It could certainly be +1 cost.
Where I can see it making the most difference in is prolonged blade contact. It will prevent the enemies weapon from running down your blade, either giving you more hand protection or otherwise giving you more control of the interaction. That means it should somehow interact with either the Parry or Wind maneuvers.
I would probably give it -1AC cost to Wind.
Re: Weapon Stats Game
Posted: 08 Sep 2017, 13:05
by EinBein
But in any case: were Flamberges (the big two handed ones) really made for single combat? So would it make sense to give such a weapon an advantage in duel situations?
Re: Weapon Stats Game
Posted: 08 Sep 2017, 13:52
by thirtythr33
They were (like zweihanders) purportedly used to knock aside polearms in a pike-block. That could reasonable be interpreted as either a parry or a wind.
Re: Weapon Stats Game
Posted: 08 Sep 2017, 15:54
by Agamemnon
FortPwnall wrote:Hmmm... I'm looking at this further. Wikipedia says:
When parrying with such a sword, unpleasant vibrations may be transmitted into the attacker's blade. These vibrations cause the blades to slow contact with each other because additional friction is encountered with each wave.
The arma thread includes speculation that the shape was intended for decreasing drag!
It seems that this is a feature that would need to be more carefully researched first before one could really say what advantages or disadvantages it would give.
At the very least, it is accepted that the sword would be harder to make. The safest rule (for the moment?) would probably be to just consider it an expensive aesthetic modification, until actual advantage can be determined.
You've found a lot of the same stuff we did. I have some notes and ideas, but I'm holding them back for that very reason. I've been trying to find people who can actually speak to the thing with authority. Even our usual sources (Norwood, Warzecha, Lloyd) come up dry on this one. Easton keeps saying he'll make a video on it, but he hasn't gotten around to it yet, unfortunately.
EinBein wrote:But in any case: were Flamberges (the big two handed ones) really made for single combat? So would it make sense to give such a weapon an advantage in duel situations?
These swords are actually quite hard to pin down. The common explanation is that they were often used for pike blocks, which I'm sure is true to some degree.. but the specifics are occasionally suspect. The idea that they chop off the heads of pikes is almost certainly apocryphal. Even if that could occasionally happen, that certainly wouldn't have been the primary purpose. Even with a blade that large, chopping into and through something as thick as a pike shaft that was being held by a person (and thus, would give on impact) is incredibly difficult if it's possible at all. Even if you succeeded, unless you cut the pike at a precise 90 degree angle to the shaft you've succeeded only in being skewered with a sharp bit of wood instead of a sharp bit of metal.. and that's if we're ignoring the fact that there are numerous other pike heads pointed at you simultaneously.
On the other hand, if we also have a quite similar sword called a montanto that has a number of surviving treatises on its use. We know these were used in single combat, but most information I've found on them actually puts them in the unusual position of a melee point-defense weapon, often with the context of guarding a hallway, doorway, or a specific person behind you. It's really interesting stuff.
Also:
Re: Weapon Stats Game
Posted: 09 Sep 2017, 02:53
by higgins
FortPwnall wrote:Hmmm... I'm looking at this further. Wikipedia says:
When parrying with such a sword, unpleasant vibrations may be transmitted into the attacker's blade. These vibrations cause the blades to slow contact with each other because additional friction is encountered with each wave.
This wiki paragraph seems to have been written by a person with no concept of the fact that sharp blades will "stick" to each other when contacting edge to edge. In fact, this is why some of the techniques in the treatises don't seem to work when trying them out with blunts. Blackfencer has done a lot of good work for HEMA to be able to experience that with his sharp simulators, which coincidentally look like flamberges at a distance: http://www.blackfencer.com/en/10-sharp-simulator-line But since so few people ever fence with sharps, and since flamberges are horrendously expensive (I'm not even sure if quality sharps are available at all), I guess we won't get to know any time soon whether the wavy blade has anything to do with additional blade stickiness, or in adverse, the lack of it thereof.
Re: Weapon Stats Game
Posted: 09 Sep 2017, 04:29
by Benedict
Wavy blades. Hrmph. Now that is a bitch, ain't it?
youtu.be/BB6rillKnCE
Skip directly to 2:18-7:03 where he talks about wavy blades. Or watch the whole thing, it has tons of useful information.
Anyway, I have to say I totally agree with Matt's three points in the video. Not only it makes perfect sense from a mechanical point of view, its quite close to what I've learned through training.
No, I don't own a wavy sword or knife. Neither have I ever handled any. But.
I have been training with Chinese weapons for quite some time. There are especially two polearms of note when flame-pattern blades are concerned.
The first is the shé máo qiāng ( 蛇矛枪 : literally "snake tongue spear"):
The second is the fāng tiān jǐ ( 方天戟 : literally "square sky halberd"):
Having trained extensively with both, I know for a fact that these two babies have an extensive array of pulling straight slashes (for lack of a better term; essentially a backward thrust slicing the target with the wavy edge) in their respective curriculum, which are quite different from the standard qiang (spear) techniques.
We also have some interesting info coming from the Romans. The ancient writer Polybius described that the Celts used spears and javelins with wavy and rippled blades which not only penetrated, but tore the flesh as they were used. Numerous spears that fit this description have been found across Continental Europe and in Britain, including several at the site of La Tène.
We also have wave-pattern curved swords from Persia and India:
Finally we have the existence of wavy bladed European Renaissance polearms along with swords:
With all these in mind I tend to form the opinion that a wavy blade should cut better than a straight blade against light (non-metal and/or non-rigid) armor without loosing their ability to thrust like curved swords do. It also should have a bigger cost (+2 or even +3). As for maintenance, maybe double all costs associated?
thirtythr33 wrote:For the next person:
Nice longswords.
Each would be:
Longsword
Base: Cost r2
Double-edged : 0c/1p
Reach: Long ; Cost+1, Uses Swords
Tapper: Blade Heavy ; Swing+1, Cost+1
Hilt Upgrades
Bastard: Gains 1.5h
Compound Hilt: Cost+1, gains Compound Hilt
Wealthy Customizations: Cost+2
Minor sculptural elements in hilt
Minor etching of blade
Mirror polish
1h DR +1c/+1p ; 2h DR +2c/+2p ; Reach Long ; Cost r7 ; 1.5h ; Compound Hilt ; Uses Sword and/or Longsword
