2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

For talking about the plot, the art, the dialogue, the characters, the site, and the individual updates...
User avatar
davester65
Mage/Priest War Veteran
Posts: 463
Joined: January 7th, 2008, 6:11 pm
Location: New Hampshire

Re: 2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

Post by davester65 »

Slamlander wrote:Actually, that trick could also be used with the pointy end, as well as the bell guard. However in a sword v. bo fight, the operator of the staff is quite well aware of that vulnerability and there are a number of ways to guard against it.
Apparently Sara missed that lesson. :?
User avatar
DarkIntruder
Mage/Priest War Veteran
Posts: 433
Joined: August 29th, 2007, 8:29 am
Location: Frigid wastes of Southern Ontario

Re: 2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

Post by DarkIntruder »

Slamlander wrote:Actually, that trick could also be used with the pointy end, as well as the bell guard. However in a sword v. bo fight, the operator of the staff is quite well aware of that vulnerability and there are a number of ways to guard against it.
Actually, I might go so far as to state that the staff actually has a great advantage over a sword, due to it's length.

George Silver, the 16th century swordsman, stated that the quarterstaff (which is around 8' long) has an advantage over most other hand to hand weapons.

George Silver wrote:
Of the vantages of weapons in their kinds, places, & times, both in private and public fight.

First I will begin with the worst weapon, an imperfect and insufficient weapon, and not worth the speaking of, but now being highly esteemed, therefore not to be unremembered. That is, the single rapier, and rapier and poniard.

The single sword has the vantage against the single rapier.

The sword and dagger has the vantage against the rapier and poniard.

The sword & target has the advantage against the sword and dagger, or the rapier and poniard.

The sword and buckler has advantage against the sword and target, the sword and dagger, or rapier and poniard.

The two handed sword has the vantage against the sword and target, the sword and buckler, the sword and dagger, or rapier and poniard.

The battle axe, the halberd, the black-bill, or such like weapons of weight, appertaining unto guard or battle, are all one in fight, and have advantage against the two handed sword, the sword and buckler, the sword and target, the sword and dagger, or the rapier and poniard.

The short staff or half pike, forest bill, partisan, or glaive, or such like weapons of perfect length, have the advantage against the battle axe, the halberd, the black bill, the two handed sword, the sword and target, and are too hard for two swords and daggers, or two rapier and poniards with gauntlets, and for the long staff and morris pike.

The long staff, morris pike, or javelin, or such like weapons above the perfect length, have advantage against all manner of weapons, the short staff, the Welch hook, partisan, or glaive, or such like weapons of vantage excepted, yet are too weak for two swords and daggers or two sword and bucklers, or two rapiers and poniards with gauntlets, because they are too long to thrust, strike, and turn speedily. And by reason of the large distance, one of the sword and dagger-men will get behind him.

The Welch hook or forest bill, has advantage against all manner of weapons whatsoever.

In my experience, (mostly second-hand though it may be) the deciding factor is most often skill. A skilled person with their chosen weapon can often defeat lesser skilled opponents with better weapons.

However, I will state that Sara's Duras Flamma is rather impractical, with a blade on either end. I quote - "If exotic weapons were any good, then they wouldn't be exotic, would they?"
User avatar
Viking-Sensei
Evil Admin Overlord
Posts: 1193
Joined: August 14th, 2007, 12:18 pm
Twitter @: Kallisti_x
Location: Vikingopolis, USA
Contact:

Re: 2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

Post by Viking-Sensei »

George Silver wrote:
Of the vantages of weapons in their kinds, places, & times, both in private and public fight.

First I will begin with the worst weapon, an imperfect and insufficient weapon, and not worth the speaking of, but now being highly esteemed, therefore not to be unremembered. That is, the single rapier, and rapier and poniard.

The single sword has the vantage against the single rapier.

The sword and dagger has the vantage against the rapier and poniard.

The sword & target has the advantage against the sword and dagger, or the rapier and poniard.

The sword and buckler has advantage against the sword and target, the sword and dagger, or rapier and poniard.

The two handed sword has the vantage against the sword and target, the sword and buckler, the sword and dagger, or rapier and poniard.

The battle axe, the halberd, the black-bill, or such like weapons of weight, appertaining unto guard or battle, are all one in fight, and have advantage against the two handed sword, the sword and buckler, the sword and target, the sword and dagger, or the rapier and poniard.

The short staff or half pike, forest bill, partisan, or glaive, or such like weapons of perfect length, have the advantage against the battle axe, the halberd, the black bill, the two handed sword, the sword and target, and are too hard for two swords and daggers, or two rapier and poniards with gauntlets, and for the long staff and morris pike.

The long staff, morris pike, or javelin, or such like weapons above the perfect length, have advantage against all manner of weapons, the short staff, the Welch hook, partisan, or glaive, or such like weapons of vantage excepted, yet are too weak for two swords and daggers or two sword and bucklers, or two rapiers and poniards with gauntlets, because they are too long to thrust, strike, and turn speedily. And by reason of the large distance, one of the sword and dagger-men will get behind him.

The Welch hook or forest bill, has advantage against all manner of weapons whatsoever.
Yes, but the giant battle hammer (none of that wussy war hammer business) beats them all any day of the week.
DarkIntruder wrote: In my experience, (mostly second-hand though it may be) the deciding factor is most often skill. A skilled person with their chosen weapon can often defeat lesser skilled opponents with better weapons.

However, I will state that Sara's Duras Flamma is rather impractical, with a blade on either end. I quote - "If exotic weapons were any good, then they wouldn't be exotic, would they?"
I always figured that anyone with a double-bladed energy weapon was simply not thinking things through clearly enough. I'd use it like a short sword, with only one energy blade extended at a time, however I'd be able to instantly switch from forward to backward holding styles by switching which blade was out, thus allowing me the benefits of using a "twin blade" style system without having to fiddle with which hand is holding which thing which way.
How could a plan this awesome possibly fail?
Image
User avatar
Imp-Chan
Not Yet Dead
Posts: 1407
Joined: August 10th, 2007, 11:03 am
Twitter @: ImpChan
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Contact:

Re: 2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

Post by Imp-Chan »

Maybe they could modify them to work that way, but the Ensigerum didn't know how, so Sara never learned that?

^-^'
Because scary little devil girls have to stick together.
Image
User avatar
Slamlander
Keeper of the Holy Algorithms
Posts: 1081
Joined: August 20th, 2007, 2:14 am
Location: Nyon, CH, near Geneve, on the shores of the Lac Leman. The heart of Suisse Romande.
Contact:

Re: 2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

Post by Slamlander »

George Silver wrote:
Of the vantages of weapons in their kinds, places, & times, both in private and public fight.

First I will begin with the worst weapon, an imperfect and insufficient weapon, and not worth the speaking of, but now being highly esteemed, therefore not to be unremembered. That is, the single rapier, and rapier and poniard.

The single sword has the vantage against the single rapier.

The sword and dagger has the vantage against the rapier and poniard.

The sword & target has the advantage against the sword and dagger, or the rapier and poniard.

The sword and buckler has advantage against the sword and target, the sword and dagger, or rapier and poniard.

The two handed sword has the vantage against the sword and target, the sword and buckler, the sword and dagger, or rapier and poniard.

The battle axe, the halberd, the black-bill, or such like weapons of weight, appertaining unto guard or battle, are all one in fight, and have advantage against the two handed sword, the sword and buckler, the sword and target, the sword and dagger, or the rapier and poniard.

The short staff or half pike, forest bill, partisan, or glaive, or such like weapons of perfect length, have the advantage against the battle axe, the halberd, the black bill, the two handed sword, the sword and target, and are too hard for two swords and daggers, or two rapier and poniards with gauntlets, and for the long staff and morris pike.

The long staff, morris pike, or javelin, or such like weapons above the perfect length, have advantage against all manner of weapons, the short staff, the Welch hook, partisan, or glaive, or such like weapons of vantage excepted, yet are too weak for two swords and daggers or two sword and bucklers, or two rapiers and poniards with gauntlets, because they are too long to thrust, strike, and turn speedily. And by reason of the large distance, one of the sword and dagger-men will get behind him.

The Welch hook or forest bill, has advantage against all manner of weapons whatsoever.
Silver had never seen Naginata (a polearm) or the Katana (a short two-handed sword). He also said nothing of the broadsword or sword-rapier (both out of fashion by his time).
Viking-Sensei wrote:Yes, but the giant battle hammer (none of that wussy war hammer business) beats them all any day of the week.
Most cannot (even then) handle swinging a five-pound sledge all day. Something that heavy isn't fast enough to be used for defense.
DarkIntruder wrote:In my experience, (mostly second-hand though it may be) the deciding factor is most often skill. A skilled person with their chosen weapon can often defeat lesser skilled opponents with better weapons.
That depends on the degree of the weapon's differences. Yes, a guy with a toothpick (Arkansas Toothpick) can beat a guy with a gun if the dude with the gun is wildly incompetent.
DarkIntruder wrote:However, I will state that Sara's Duras Flamma is rather impractical, with a blade on either end. I quote - "If exotic weapons were any good, then they wouldn't be exotic, would they?"
There is actually a fallacy in that statement; were it taken for absolute truth, then we wouldn't have new weapons, since the stone age. New weapons are always exotic until they become better known.
User avatar
Imp-Chan
Not Yet Dead
Posts: 1407
Joined: August 10th, 2007, 11:03 am
Twitter @: ImpChan
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Contact:

Re: 2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

Post by Imp-Chan »

Slamlander wrote:
Viking-Sensei wrote:Yes, but the giant battle hammer (none of that wussy war hammer business) beats them all any day of the week.
Most cannot (even then) handle swinging a five-pound sledge all day. Something that heavy isn't fast enough to be used for defense.
Having actually seen the "If I had a Hammer" song performed live by Pete Seeger (by then quite old), along with him driving in a railway nail with a giant sledgehammer at an amazing pace... I have to disagree with that statement. I believe that if someone had practice slinging one of those things or something similar all day every day with the object of speed (such as the people who actually laid the railways must have done, and as it would be reasonable to assume that those wielding it as a weapon also must have done), it would indeed be effective as a weapon, and quite fast enough.

^-^'

Edit: The idea I'm discussing weaponry and the Pete Seeger concert that I saw at FGC Gathering (a Quaker event) in the same paragraph is deeply wierding me out.
Because scary little devil girls have to stick together.
Image
User avatar
DarkIntruder
Mage/Priest War Veteran
Posts: 433
Joined: August 29th, 2007, 8:29 am
Location: Frigid wastes of Southern Ontario

Re: 2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

Post by DarkIntruder »

Sorry for the delay. I had a rebuttal all written up, but then the power went out.
Slamlander wrote:
Silver had never seen Naginata (a polearm) or the Katana (a short two-handed sword). He also said nothing of the broadsword or sword-rapier (both out of fashion by his time).
I would consider the halberd, bill, partisan or glaive to be polearms. Blades on a long stick. Marvelously effective in a battlefield scenario, but limited in a civilian encounter, unless it was short enough. The naginata is almost exactly the same in principle. They were exceptionally common in Silver's time.

The katana, on the other hand, is an anomaly. Unlike European swords, it basically kept the same form for almost a thousand years, mostly due to Japan's (self-imposed for a good part) isolation. It didn't evolve to combat different defenses and situations. ( armour, and civilian duels.) In fact, it became so venerated, that it took on a life of it's own, outside of being a weapon. I actually consider a katana to have a slight disadvantage against other weapons, since it lacks reach, one of the great equalizes in combat.

As for the broadsword, what definition are you using? The knightly sword from the middle ages, or the basket hilted broadsword that existed at the same time as the rapier? The first I would agree was out of style by Silver's time, but the second was his preferred weapon. The term broadsword was made up by Victorian culture, to describe all weapons that were broader then the rapier, but it's true definition is a basket hilted weapon that was contemporary to the rapier.

George Silver hated the rapier, mostly because he was a patriotic Englishman, and disliked the Italian masters who used it. The rapier is wonderfully effective in a civilian duel, but almost useless in a battlefield scenario.

Silver's list of weapons took into account both civilian duels and battlefield, but for all that, it still has it's flaws. Weapons just can't be pounded into different slots, one being better then the other.
Viking-Sensei wrote:Yes, but the giant battle hammer (none of that wussy war hammer business) beats them all any day of the week.
Slamlander wrote: Most cannot (even then) handle swinging a five-pound sledge all day. Something that heavy isn't fast enough to be used for defense.
Well, technically, you could swing it in circles with "viking fury", but after 5 minutes, you'd need an iced tea, and a cat nap. Plus, any half-decent guy with a faster weapon would turn you into shish-kabob long before that.
DarkIntruder wrote:In my experience, (mostly second-hand though it may be) the deciding factor is most often skill. A skilled person with their chosen weapon can often defeat lesser skilled opponents with better weapons.
That depends on the degree of the weapon's differences. Yes, a guy with a toothpick (Arkansas Toothpick) can beat a guy with a gun if the dude with the gun is wildly incompetent. Well, yes. A man with a spear has a great advantage over a man with a sword, because he can keep him at arms length. Guns are the great equalizer. Suddenly, an untrained person can kill someone who has trained his entire life with another weapon.
DarkIntruder wrote:However, I will state that Sara's Duras Flamma is rather impractical, with a blade on either end. I quote - "If exotic weapons were any good, then they wouldn't be exotic, would they?"
Slamlander wrote: There is actually a fallacy in that statement; were it taken for absolute truth, then we wouldn't have new weapons, since the stone age. New weapons are always exotic until they become better known.
Yes, but I wouldn't consider a useful evolution to be exotic. A poleaxe is an axe on a stick. Different from anything that has come before, but a natural evolution, and highly effective. My statement is in reference to items that "look really cool" or have some advantage in specific circumstances, but is ultimately impractical. Sara's Duras Flamma was built as a stylized dueling weapon, so it would fit. Same with Chinese butterfly swords, sickle swords, and other exotic stuff. Simpler weapons are often better. Take a man, give him a sword, train him for ten years, and a spearman with the same amount of training can still skewer him in no time.

If anyone is getting bored with my explanations, feel free to let me know. I know that many find this sort of thing tedious or weird, but I have a great interest in it, due to my love of history.
User avatar
Neko7
Mage/Priest War Veteran
Posts: 420
Joined: August 19th, 2007, 11:55 pm

Re: 2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

Post by Neko7 »

This pretty paragraph didn't consider 2 points:

- The speed of the weapon (specially when they start moving, without the help of the inercia)
- The type of armor.


As a kid I had wonder why people where using some weapon intead of other, and why it was so many weapon, the answer was:
A weapon give birth to a type of armor to protect from it, which give birth to a type of weapon to defeat it, which give birth to a type of armor to protect from it...
Until guns where invented: gun go true armor, therefor armor to protect agains powerfull sword and weapon where useless, therefore big eavy armor where pointless, therefore big eavy slow weapon where lacking speed again lighter weapon as mortal on someone without udge armor ( yes, success of the rapier is due to the effect of the guns on the armor)
User avatar
DarkIntruder
Mage/Priest War Veteran
Posts: 433
Joined: August 29th, 2007, 8:29 am
Location: Frigid wastes of Southern Ontario

Re: 2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

Post by DarkIntruder »

Except that rapiers weren't used on the battlefield. Ever. Too light, and it's very difficult to cut someone with it. Sabres were the weapon of cavalry, post- 1600, and infantry relied on fixed bayonets, which turned their firearms into short spears, or small chopping swords like cutlasses and hangers.


You're right though. Swords, (among other more widely used weapons) were highly effective, until armour arose to defeat them (well, the armour increase came about to defeat arrows, primarily, but it had the same effect) so other weapons became more important, like the mace, hammer, poleaxe, etc. Then guns came along, (alongside all the other stuff) and armour tried to catch up, but it couldn't. So armour was abandoned, and the sword became useful again.

I'm simplifying greatly, but I could debate for hours, (and do) about the history of swords, armour, and other such things.

Just remember, there are exceptions to every situation, and nothing is absolute.
User avatar
Slamlander
Keeper of the Holy Algorithms
Posts: 1081
Joined: August 20th, 2007, 2:14 am
Location: Nyon, CH, near Geneve, on the shores of the Lac Leman. The heart of Suisse Romande.
Contact:

Re: 2008-03-03 "So, how's Meji doing?" "Uh..."

Post by Slamlander »

DarkIntruder wrote:Except that rapiers weren't used on the battlefield. Ever. Too light, and it's very difficult to cut someone with it. Sabres were the weapon of cavalry, post- 1600, and infantry relied on fixed bayonets, which turned their firearms into short spears, or small chopping swords like cutlasses and hangers.
You forget about sword-rapiers, perhaps. They were really a light broadsword that handled like a rapier. They were popular among the higher classes in France, for while.
DarkIntruder wrote:You're right though. Swords, (among other more widely used weapons) were highly effective, until armour arose to defeat them (well, the armour increase came about to defeat arrows, primarily, but it had the same effect) so other weapons became more important, like the mace, hammer, poleaxe, etc. Then guns came along, (alongside all the other stuff) and armour tried to catch up, but it couldn't. So armour was abandoned, and the sword became useful again.

I'm simplifying greatly, but I could debate for hours, (and do) about the history of swords, armour, and other such things.
Armor, in the way of ceramic bullet-proof stuff, may be coming back into vogue.
Post Reply