|
Post by schnitzelsandwich on Mar 3, 2019 3:35:31 GMT
Hey y'all, how are you? Anyways, I play D&D a lot and in the game longsword uses strength for the roles but scimitar and rapier use dexterity, and that doesn't seem to make much sense to me. I know life isn't really compounded by D&D stats, but wouldn't it make more sense for scimitar and rapier to use strength while longsword uses dexterity as the longsword would require less strength? What are your thoughts on this?
|
|
Ifrit
Member
More edgy than a double edge sword
Posts: 3,284
|
Post by Ifrit on Mar 3, 2019 3:37:38 GMT
I feel like all swords require both strength and dexterity. It makes no sense how some can be strength weapons only when a sword by design is one of the more agile weapons for war that take time to learn how to use, and years to know how to use well
|
|
Ifrit
Member
More edgy than a double edge sword
Posts: 3,284
|
Post by Ifrit on Mar 3, 2019 3:41:03 GMT
If the stats are only being used relative to each other, then it kinda misrepresents the virtues of many swords. A sword that takes strength and dexterity might not seem worth the time that a sword that only needs dexterity. I think the current stats we measure swords by are the best. Weight, which Determins how fast you can use it, along with balance, but they also imply what sort of damage they might do. Sorry if that's like.. Uncool of me or something to say these. I feel the way we measure things would give some realistically applicable stats to video games and board games. It would have similar, but more sensical results But for the actual post, I'm sure someone who knows more about D&D can give a better answer. But this is in the sword training sub reddit so I gave what I thought an appropriate response
|
|
|
Post by schnitzelsandwich on Mar 3, 2019 4:03:57 GMT
Which sword would you say has the greatest potential to throw the greatest amount of cuts within a given amount of time?
|
|
Ifrit
Member
More edgy than a double edge sword
Posts: 3,284
|
Post by Ifrit on Mar 3, 2019 4:21:45 GMT
A light arming sword maybe. Could cycle in some false edge cuts into your wrist cuts. Wouldn't be the deepest cuts around, but it would do the most.
Of course that's not the easiest thing to test out
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Mar 3, 2019 4:28:39 GMT
Fastest cuts? Saber or scimitar...that's what they do. Poke a dozen holes fast, rapier,smallsword. Just for speed alone. We've had discussions like this at my game table, and really, it amounts to which stat do you excel in...use a particular weapon... The real break out is in max damage, the 2H swords etc just excel. The balance is if you go all in on dex, that adds to your AC. Strength does not... Just my .02
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Mar 3, 2019 5:44:08 GMT
I think it's less the type of sword but the weight. For me it depends on the style if fighting and the way it should hit. Is it made to hew or punch through armor or for fast puncture or slashes? A heavy cavalry saber for heavy hewing cuts needs strenght as much as an "anti-armor" longsword does. A lighter infantry sabers or arming swords, jian, spadroon, smallsword etc. (fencing swords) benefit from dexterity. Heavy hewing or fancy fencing?
|
|
stormmaster
Member
I like viking/migration era swords
Posts: 7,647
|
Post by stormmaster on Mar 3, 2019 5:46:12 GMT
i feel like a gladius, spatha or something one hand and smaller should be considered dexterous, never had one that didnt move swift in the hand
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Mar 3, 2019 5:52:07 GMT
Another thought: How much emphasis lies in defense with the sword? The more you need a fast sword to protect you from attacks because you have no shield or armor the more you need dexterity. The D&D AC increase makes sense.
|
|
Ifrit
Member
More edgy than a double edge sword
Posts: 3,284
|
Post by Ifrit on Mar 3, 2019 6:20:43 GMT
i feel like a gladius, spatha or something one hand and smaller should be considered dexterous, never had one that didnt move swift in the hand Yea i agree actually. They are nimble and are more easily rotated around the hand and I'm guessing many wouldn't even touch the body if the weilder, while holding it in his hand, pointed it towards himself with an outstretched hand
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Mar 3, 2019 7:42:23 GMT
Which sword would you say has the greatest potential to throw the greatest amount of cuts within a given amount of time? Greatest amount of cuts or most effective cuts? A smallsword with a diamond section blade will throw many many cuts. A fighting sabre will take a head off and can still throw cuts fairly quickly. As per being dextrous, I have practiced sabre, longsword, and rapier and dagger. I personally think single handed swords are more intuitive and offer more opportunity for defense/offense. Longswords Will require less strength as will most two handed swords. Imagine holding a 3 pound weight in two hands, vs holding a 2.5 pound weight in one hand in a mostly extended arm. In my opinion - dexterity and strength go hand in hand when regarding bladed weapons, as you need at least a certain amount of strength is required when speaking of skill regarding sword skills. Not necessarily a massive amount of strength, but if you never really exercise or workout you won't be able to hold a sustained engagement for very long if you do not at least practice often to build up the muscles required for the sword work. If by dexterity you are thinking of agility, equal. Maybe rapier and dagger over both of those just in terms of having to manage both weapons at once. Cross parries are a b!tch! But super helpful and I have a great teacher.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Mar 3, 2019 7:44:43 GMT
A pocket knife will cut faster than any sword, but a stout cavalry mans sabre will take the pocket knife out of the hand, and the hand off the arm. Not as many cuts, but much more effective cuts.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Mar 3, 2019 10:08:31 GMT
The longsword is more tiresome to use correctly (and in its period context) because it needs whole body movement to reach its potential. The saber and many other one handed swords are better suited for use from the arm and shoulder, and don`t ask for as much passing footwork (in general, speaking about western traditions mainly).
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Mar 3, 2019 10:19:29 GMT
Hey y'all, how are you? Anyways, I play D&D a lot and in the game longsword uses strength for the roles but scimitar and rapier use dexterity, and that doesn't seem to make much sense to me. I know life isn't really compounded by D&D stats, but wouldn't it make more sense for scimitar and rapier to use strength while longsword uses dexterity as the longsword would require less strength? What are your thoughts on this? Which longsword and which saber? (Or scimitar; the only actual difference is that "scimitar" typically implies Middle-Eastern or Indian aesthetics.) IRL, no weapon type is monolithic and all contain multitudes - far larger differences exist between two sabers, or between two longswords, than between sabers and longswords as a whole. The divide is also kinda nonsensical for the purposes of a question like this. IRL there's no meaningful functional categorical difference between straight and curved blades that could be expressed in D&D terms, or in the terms used by any humanly playable game system, for that matter. Sabers also come in one-handed (pre-5e D&D "longsword"), two-handed ("greatsword") and intermediate (pre-5e "bastard sword" or 5e "longsword") configurations, just like straight swords... So what exactly is the actual categorical difference supposed to be? Is it the size, the shape of the blade, the design of the grip and hilt, the associated methods of use, or something else? Because again, all those vary widely within either type of sword. Which sword would you say has the greatest potential to throw the greatest amount of cuts within a given amount of time? Things like that only really matter for cutting competitions - and, like I said above, vary far more between individual swords than between sword types.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Mar 3, 2019 11:29:00 GMT
Decelerating the weapon is the most demanding part of movement. In general, one handed swords (especially cutting swords) can float around the body (due to freedom given from the mobile shoulder and elbow joints and/or wrist), whereas two handed swords must most often cut to a dead stop. Of course one has more power using two hands (but only if using the right tool), but the power has to go somewhere and needs to be absorbed, also. So a heavier saber (putting stress on specific areas, such as foream and shoulder) is less tiresome than a light longsword (putting stress on larger muscle groups/chains, especially in decelaration) , if both are being used correctly and with intend.
Also its wrong to think of strength and dexterity as seperated virtues, especially regarding the use of swords. And then there is the question of what kinds of strength and what kinds of dexterity.
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Mar 3, 2019 18:50:46 GMT
The stats and gaming nerd in me loves this thread. Like everyone's mentioned, I see it as a combination of stats/elements.
A game that I think gets the dexterity/strength concept perfectly correct is Dark Souls. Strength is defined as "parameter required to wield powerful weapons", dexterity is defined as "parameter required to wield advanced weapons"and endurance is "parameter determining stamina and equipment load". Every weapon requires a certain minimum value of STR or DEX, and each weapon scales with STR or DEX more or less depending on its type. A claymore scales equally, as you need a balanced combination of power and technique to wield it, whereas a big ol' club just scales with strength since you bash people over the head with it. Scimitars (sabres), katana, rapier and daggers all scale with DEX primarily, with the assumption that so long as you have some strength it's mostly about how nimble and technical you get with the weapon's implementation. Endurance then accounts for physical stamina, how many swings can be taken, which reflects physical conditioning.
I actually think these three stats translate fairly well to real swordplay from my experience spending obsessive amounts of time with both swordplay and dark souls. Endurance constitutes your conditioning and ability to take action for prolonged periods, whereas strength and dexterity reflect force generation and technical application, respectively.
But then we have to factor in different designs for different weapons: something like a type xiii longsword would scale more with strength whereas a type xva would scale more with dexterity. Same with rapier; a 41 in. weighing in at close to 3 lbs is a whole different beast from a 38 in. blade weighing in at under 2.5 lbs. So then it becomes a question of minimum stats and then stat scaling, to what extent improving those stats facilitates greater weapon performance.
Now I just want to come up with a hypothetical stat scaling chart for all these types and subtypes of weapons. I warned you guys, I'm a huge stats nerd and this is a dangerous thread for me lol
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Mar 3, 2019 20:27:05 GMT
\this is a dangerous thread for me lol Indeed! Me too. I'd forgotten the gladius style weapons...gods, paired with a shield, you can stab like a maniac. In game terms, they just tell you how many attacks/actions you get. BAH I say. And I hadn't mentioned constitution, because you will get tired fighting...and the better trained (higher con) you are, the longer you last. So true story from my younger years in the SCA...I was awful, couldn't fight my way outta a wet paper bag. But I had lots of time to train, so I started running and hit the gym. About 2 months in I started to see a benefit...fast forward 2 years. I did improve some in my fighting, but my stamina was AMAZING. So I could wear out person after person, doing stupid range games, and when they were spent, win. So there is something to be said for a 4 STR, 4 DEX and 18 Con.
|
|
|
Post by schnitzelsandwich on Mar 3, 2019 22:07:54 GMT
I appreciate the reply guys!
So what I got from this thread summed up is this: One handed weapons require more initial strength as the power is coming from one hand/one arm, but once you get used to that strength they are generally more nimble and agile.
I know that's a gross oversimplification but that's the idea, correct?
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Mar 3, 2019 22:41:38 GMT
The problem lies in the "get used to that strenght". Try to use a 7 lb Atlantean as fast as a 1 lb smallsword single handed, schnitzel (German?) (I tried... = INT 0)
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Mar 3, 2019 22:43:17 GMT
Not quite what I meant, at least. A two handed sword can be more, just as or less nimble than a one handed sword (depending on mass and mass distribution), but two handed swords are meant to be used with power and whole-body motions (since the two-hand grip), so they are more tiresome to use (in general).
|
|