|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Mar 3, 2019 22:46:13 GMT
... aaand a two handed sword means you have no shield, ... armor, arrows?
|
|
|
Post by wlewisiii on Mar 3, 2019 22:47:46 GMT
D&D's level of abstraction is much higher than other games as well. This has a profound impact on how you approach the skill of fencing. Pick up a copy of Harnmaster or Riddle of Steel sometime for the opposite problem. For simulation that didn't slow things down to a statistical nightmare chasing charts I found Runequest to provide a good balance. Weapon skill vs parry skill & then deal with armor on percentile dice. Since your group is unlikely to change just keep using 5E and enjoy it for what it is - the best version of D&D yet. I tell my Gm I'm carrying a saber, 1d8 slashing & rapier proficiency. Buckler too if on foot
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Mar 3, 2019 23:35:26 GMT
I'd say it depends on the sabre. Cavalry sabres for example can be very substantial one handed swords with heavy cutting blades. But some Italian dueling sabres are light as a feather and very nimble in the point. They are both technically sabres, but the handling dynamics couldnt be more polar opposite. I've played my share of DnD, and if I were DMing, I'd do one of the following.
1. Make a weapon called a Dueling or Infantry Sabre and give it the same stats of the in game rapier including use of a dex modifier, but label its damage type as "slashing" rather than "piercing". 2. Make a weapon called a "cavalry sabre" and make it work off Str modifier, plus give the wielder some sort of advantage to using it while mounted (or a disadvantage while dismounted). 2. Do both 1 and 2 and just have two types of in game sabre.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Mar 4, 2019 0:25:19 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). I'll disagree, even though you do use your whole body with longsword more often than most single sword systems, I think if anything they're equal if you really go out in it, and I know in my experience rapier and dagger fencing has been much more tiring than any longswording I did.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Mar 4, 2019 0:35:11 GMT
Rapier and dagger = both arms forward (lot of stress on the back sling), lots of passing footwork. Rapier plus dagger ̴ 2 kg / 4 pd. Double weapon = lots of mental stress, adds up to the cardio.
… There`s so much sloppy longsword going on, it’s just plain funny (not that you’re doing sloppy longsword necessarily).
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Mar 4, 2019 0:49:48 GMT
Rapier and dagger = both arms forward (lot of stress on the back sling), lots of passing footwork. Rapier plus dagger ̴ 2 kg / 4 pd. Double weapon = lots of mental stress, adds up to the cardio.
… There`s so much sloppy longsword going on, it’s just plain funny (not that you’re doing sloppy longsword necessarily). Honestly, I haven't done serious longsword in like 2 years. I used to be pretty decent at it, but stopped attending because it just wasn't interesting to me.
|
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,625
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Mar 4, 2019 15:20:50 GMT
Perhaps favoring Dex or Str should be a function of style rather than an inherent property of the weapon.
One school of longsword may focus more on percussive, aggressive defense, cutting into an opponents attacks, and powerful cleaving strikes (Strength focused), and another style may focus on agile footwork constantly moving in and out of measure, deftly riposting off of a parry, and uses short, blindingly fast cuts from both edges when an opening presents itself (Dexterity focused).
One could justify a focus on Strength or Dexterity for just about any weapon (especially since all of a character's stats are abstractions with no clear parallel to reality).
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Mar 4, 2019 17:54:27 GMT
One thing that needs to be clear--swords aren't heavy. The biggest still come in well under 10 lbs. What's taxing muscles tends to be bad technique and poorly balanced blades or blades being used for the wrong purpose (like a blade-heavy cav saber being used for fast sparring on the ground) and above all else--YOUR OPPONENT. Without an opponent, you can run drills over and over again for hours. WITH an opponent even high level athletes get exhausted after a few full speed/full contact bouts. I know one man who had to be taken to the ER after doing several dozen in succession.
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Mar 5, 2019 20:09:21 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. Right? As in real life, also in gaming, I've preferred lighter equipment since becoming fatigued makes your performance suck no matter how strong you are or how many useful techniques you know. It's also why I focus a lot on breathing rhythms as I practice, so that despite practicing for 2-3 hours any given session I rarely ever breathe heavily no matter the type of exertion in effect (a particularly fun challenge when using something like that Hanwei bastard sword of mine; no matter how much I break a sweat, I don't allow my breathing to speed up). It's really good practice, and it also seems to have some bearing on the synchronicity with footwork as well. I find focusing on that really helps you keep calm and makes it more difficult for you to experience a "oh snap, where's the air?" moment between your lungs and brain which is a real hindrance.
Now don't tell me to go for a jog though. I only run if I have a target destination, and even then it can wait.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Mar 6, 2019 6:06:41 GMT
I was browsing YouTube to while away the insomnia, so here's a couple of relevant videos... In this one you can see for yourself which of the two weapons seems faster or more "dextrous": And here's Matt Easton explaining why, in reality, it doesn't actually matter:
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Mar 6, 2019 21:46:54 GMT
Good finds! I like both videos for different reasons. zabazagobo- nope, no jogging for either of us...my knees are shot and if you wanna jog I can't keep up any more. Ahhh...Runequest - I love the old school Chaosium combat rules, for every min-max, there is a counter min-max.
|
|
|
Post by Croccifixio on Mar 22, 2019 8:35:18 GMT
Very interesting topic OP. Lots of good points have been made. Let me offer my own both in support of some ideas, and to expand and expound on them.
Swords in the age before firearms do not require much strength to wield, as is often badly understood in games and rulesets. Most historical functional swords fall into the 2 lbs range for 1 handers, and 3-5 for 2 handers. In contrast, a longbow (which often requires dexterity/agility stats in games) requires much more strength to use effectively. Similarly, axes and hammers are heavier in the hand (even when similarly weighed overall) because of their front-heaviness. Poleweapons are truly heavy to begin with, and spears are heavy to carry around though do not require that much strength to use. In my view, apart from daggers, swords should have the lowest strength requirements for any ruleset.
However, I also don't think that "dexterity" is the stat for swords. Some swords are relatively simple to use (for example, Tulwars, because they limit the hand's mobility). It isn't so much dexterity as it is skill or finesse (however this translates to games - maybe agility or even intelligence?)
If I were to make stat requirements for swords, I would principally use intelligence and maybe half of agility as the core requirement for "damage", with some minimal strength requirements.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Mar 22, 2019 21:11:54 GMT
That's a good point. Maybe a stat called "physical intelligence." Dancers always seem to be the best at picking this stuff up.
|
|