Ironworks Gaming Forum - which is best?

Ironworks Gaming Forum (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/index.php)

- General Discussion (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=36)

- - which is best? (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=93879)

Quote:

Originally posted by robertthebard:
Indeed, Aragorn1. The scimitar thing is not entirely correct, but I wouldn't say it's wrong either, as you could use them from horse back. The same could be said for sabers as well, mounted calvalry used them. Lots of weapons of the period would be considered good from a horse, but for actual combat from a horse, you may prefer the lighter slashing weapons. It would be a speed factor thing.
As to Marty4's question, I'd say it was pretty old, but I don't have exact details. Great swords were used to break pike formations, in preparation for calvalry charges, or even infantry ones. As to the long sword useage, yes, it's hilt is big enough to be used as a two handed weapon, but weight and balance wise, it was designed to be used one handed, preferrably, at least by me, with a shield.

Ok, not what I was taught, but I could be wrong.

Quote:

Originally posted by Marty4:
Who said they were slow or heavy? If we are talking about the same longsword here, the weapon is held in two hands and weighs 2-3 pounds. Believe me, I've held one. Since you use two hands, you can swing it reasonably fast, and still very powerfully. There was no "greatsword", since a giant 100 pound 8 foot blade would be useless in combat.

I doubt we are talking about the same longsword, actually - historically, iirc, there was no weapon called the longsword. The D&D longsword is roughly equivalent to a historical arming sword (with the weight you gave, as opposed to the weight D&D gives for the longsword). Two-handed swords tended to be closer to 5 lbs, I seem to recall.

In any case, though, you're correct that neither type of weapon was esceptionally slow or heavy. Personally, I'd also go with the longsword - I much prefer the aesthetic aspects, and I doubt it'd make much difference which I used given that I'm not familiar with either type.

[ 07-19-2005, 11:07 PM: Message edited by: Encard ]

Quote:

Originally posted by burnzey boi:
which would rather be your weapon of choice, a longsword or a scimitar?

scimitar pros: fast, durable, light
scimitar cons: dosn't hit hard, brittle
longsword pros: hits harder
longsword cons: slow, heavy.

which would you choose as a weapon?

Katana.

...Failing that a "longsword" (though as previously pointed out, they don't "technically" exist..)

erm.. katana is basicaly a very sharp weapon, but it wouldn't rip through tough steel or iron armour. it was designed to ct through wood as that was their only source of good armour around. besides, i wanted to change the usual "longsword and katana" thread to a scimitar one.

Rapier.

The French had the right idea [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Quote:

Originally posted by burnzey boi:
erm.. katana is basicaly a very sharp weapon, but it wouldn't rip through tough steel or iron armour. it was designed to ct through wood as that was their only source of good armour around. besides, i wanted to change the usual "longsword and katana" thread to a scimitar one.

so? I'm pretty sure a katana would pierce someone's throat, armour or no. Regardless, that's my weapon of choice. It's prettier than the other swords. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

I agree that it depends on the situation and what you are up against. A scimitar is a hacking and slashing kind of sword, it does have speed on it's side however. A longsword can be used for hacking, slashing AND piercing/stabbing. I personally own a replica longsword (for lack of a better description) and it weighs about 8 pounds and I can easily handle it in one hand (but I do practise my swordplay from time to time). Then theres that fact that these weapons may be of different alloys. I myself would choose the longsword.

Quote:

Originally posted by Calaethis Dragonsbane:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by burnzey boi:
erm.. katana is basicaly a very sharp weapon, but it wouldn't rip through tough steel or iron armour. it was designed to ct through wood as that was their only source of good armour around. besides, i wanted to change the usual "longsword and katana" thread to a scimitar one.

so? I'm pretty sure a katana would pierce someone's throat, armour or no. Regardless, that's my weapon of choice. It's prettier than the other swords. [img]tongue.gif[/img] </font>[/QUOTE]The Katana was the sword of the Samurai. It was the strongest and sharpest blade known to the world at its time, bettering even the blades of the saracens, who also used the advanced metal working techniques. The unique strength of the blade was acheived by folding the metal many times and cooling it correctly, when at the right temperature, which removed the impurities that were seen in western swords of the time. This not only gave it the worlds best cutting edge but helped to prevent it being as brittle as other thin swords.

I think 'Longword' was a general term for a sword longer than the swords used by the general man-at-arms, the longsword was the sword of the nobility, but it is a general term rather than a fixed class. Generally though they are intended for use with a shield.

[ 07-20-2005, 09:28 AM: Message edited by: Aragorn1 ]

You do relise that, katanas aren't very popular. you may have seen many movies with the "longsword" but not too many with a katana. And how can they be pretty? they all have blood on them lol.

Originaly this was posted about scims and longs, but now it's gone back to katana and longs.. rofl, that's prety crazy aye lol.

[ 07-20-2005, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: burnzey boi ]