Got a Real-World Weapon or Armor Question? Mk. VII

[Shademan]

i mean that falchion are made more for getting trough armour

and i said "cut mail" 'cus Im rreeallyyy lazy right now and a sentence about armour piercing qualities would just be ...longer

[Galloglaich]

Everyone keeps talking about how the katana would be ineffective against a Viking coat of mail because the katana was designed as a slashing weapon. This, to me anyway, begs the question, how much success would you have piercing mail with a spear or sword thrust.

Not much... the only thing which would work against a real coat of mail is a specifically armor -piercing weapon, like an angon / pilum, or a warhammer or a mace.

So you have a point. In fact the slicing cut of a katana (or any saber) is arguably better than a cutting or chopping cut against textile armors which were also ubiquitous.

But generally the best way to deal with armor was to go around it, 'cap-a-pied' (head to toe) armor coverage was fairly rare anywhere except in certain periods.

By the time you get to the late medieval period, swords are being designed to thrust with very small points, which may have been able to pierce mail especially with a half-sword thrust.

G.

[Galloglaich]

Still, The Arma had recently put decent try on their site.

Here, by clicking "Test Cotas" one can see one of the few tests of decently accurate mail against accurate arrows. Very nice.

Generally, from both practice, logic and sources, we can conclude that bursting the mail bu thrust is definitely possible, but if mail was decently made and used, it wasn't obviously easy at all - pointy weapons, and very potent ones were absolutely basic ones through the millenia, so armor that wouldn't protect well against them wouldn't be highly priced and used way more often that others.

EDIT : With another of my lengthy post, please inform me when supposed english is not english.

Spyryt,

Thanks for posting that ARMA-HELLAS test was really cool, very interesting, I hadn't seen it before. They haven't put a new vid on that page for a long time.

The other one didn't play for me, just some music.

To add to this I know Royal Armories at Leeds did several tests with some realistic riveted mail (I think from Eric Schmidt) and concluded it was virtually invulnerable to most hand weapons, but as you can see in the ARMA vid the tiny points of the Renaissance era Oakeshott Type XVa etc. can get inside a ring and still give you a nasty (if not necessarily fatal) poke, at the expense of apparently getting your sword trapped.

Bottom line mail is good protection, much better than it's portrayed in most RPGs.

G.

[Galloglaich]

i mean that falchion are made more for getting trough armour

and i said "cut mail" 'cus Im rreeallyyy lazy right now and a sentence about armour piercing qualities would just be ...longer

Yeah and his point is... they weren't. Falchions are mainly for cutting naked flesh. They aren't armor-piercing weapons. They are basically meat cleavers.

G.

[Psyx]

Infantry doesn't like to carry anything that isn't going to save their lives, because they have to wear/carry the wretched stuff. Considering the weight of armour, and the insane cost of mail, it is a pale shadow of itself in every book and film made, and most games too.

Soldiers wore the finest mail because it turned glancing blows that would maim into 'misses', and anything except a strong determined attack at a specific point into a pointless swipe. Swords don't 'cleave through mail' as has been used as a line in a thousand books. If they did: People wouldn't bother wearing it.

For starters, with the exception of the early days of the Tokugawa shogunate, when the samurai were veterans of the wars that unified Japan, a samurai was for the most part a glorified administrator.

I don't disagree with your conclusion, but over here in Europe, a rich noble with six months of fencing lessons from a master under his belt was viewed as more than a match for any thug with a few years of practical experience. That's training over brute strength and experience for you...

That said, you can bet Viking martial arts were pretty darned sophisticated. One look at the long axe and the many ways it could be used is a pretty clear indicator.

Additionally, the primary battlefield weapon of the Samurai was either the bow, used from horseback

In the C12: Sure. Samurai were elite mounted archers. By the C15-16, Samurai were much more shock-troops. The mounted archery role was no longer the primary focus.

As regards viking horses... Japan didn't exactly have great horses, either.


Commenting about variations in skill... anyone see Knight Versus Pirate, where the pirate guys managed to keep a straight face when telling us what highly skilled and trained combatants were, compared to knights (who y'know... only trained daily for combat from the time they could pretty much walk...)

[Dienekes]

Commenting about variations in skill... anyone see Knight Versus Pirate, where the pirate guys managed to keep a straight face when telling us what highly skilled and trained combatants were, compared to knights (who y'know... only trained daily for combat from the time they could pretty much walk...)

Ehh, most pirates were drop outs of their respective countries navies (mostly British) or ex-slaves and probably did have some weapon training.

Not saying they're comparable in any way to the knight, but the idea that they were an untrained disorganized rabble is a bit of a misconception.

[Tyndmyr]

Well, the big thing on Pirates vs whatever is that vikings ARE pirates. And vikings are awesome.

I have no trouble whatsoever with the idea of a bunch of vikings tearing up a bunch of knights.

[Lev]

Everyone keeps talking about how the katana would be ineffective against a Viking coat of mail because the katana was designed as a slashing weapon. This, to me anyway, begs the question, how much success would you have piercing mail with a spear or sword thrust.

Katanas are actually hybrids, they work in both a slashing and chopping motion which is looser categorized as slashing.
A saber is actually more used as a chopping motion to take off limbs where a katana is best used to disembowel. You don't see a lot of horseback katana users despite the alarming amount of horseback combat in feudal Japan.

As for vikings armor, a persons armor and their weaponry alone should tell you a lot about each other.

Not only did vikings have quite beefy mail, it was common practice to seal your money onto your chesthair with melted wax.

Now, I'm not saying that viking armor or weaponry is superior or inferior to that of feudal Japan, but I gotta say their tactics and boats are much much better. Better raiders? Hell yes.

Vikings are uni-task, they are brawlers, fighters and raiders. They do these things VERY well.

[Fortinbras]

What did people think about the musketeer vs Ming episode.

[Spamotron]

Simple question how long would it take say A master armor smith and 3-4 apprentices to craft suit of armor? Say mid 17th century heavy cavalry full plate.

[Psyx]

Not saying they're comparable in any way to the knight, but the idea that they were an untrained disorganized rabble is a bit of a misconception.

But the idea that they were as competent as a knight is laughable.

Simple question how long would it take say A master armor smith and 3-4 apprentices to craft suit of armor? Say mid 17th century heavy cavalry full plate.

Erm... I don't think there was such a thing as C17 full plate.

If you mean earlier full plate, then I believe it was made in a few places in Europe in very large workshops. Certainly more than 4 people were involved in the making of it. No idea on timescale, though.

[Yora]

What did people think about the musketeer vs Ming episode.

You are talking about Deadliest Warrior? Isn't that the show that most people with a bit of knowledge of the subject think to be completely laughable?

[Dienekes]

But the idea that they were as competent as a knight is laughable.

Well yeah, we're in agreement here.

You are talking about Deadliest Warrior? Isn't that the show that most people with a bit of knowledge of the subject think to be completely laughable?

Except a lot still watch it. Because, hell man, a guy punched through a cow!

[Spiryt]

Simple question how long would it take say A master armor smith and 3-4 apprentices to craft suit of armor? Say mid 17th century heavy cavalry full plate.

As have been said, there were at most few full plates armor suits mid 17th century, at least the utilitarian, actually battlefield ones.

Anyway, answer's obviously not very simple at all, since like with 'clothes' in general, and armor in particular, such details would hugely depend on overall quality of the piece, how well it's adjusted and fit to the owner... And many others.

[Yora]

Except a lot still watch it. Because, hell man, a guy punched through a cow!

And without having seen it, I think many people will think something similar about said episode.

[HenryHankovitch]

Simple question how long would it take say A master armor smith and 3-4 apprentices to craft suit of armor? Say mid 17th century heavy cavalry full plate.

Going off of what people have mentioned in earlier threads, I believe there are references to munitions-grade, late-medieval plate armor being turned out in a matter of a few days. Though this is more the "one size fits all," mass-produced sort of armor, rather than a custom-fit harness for a particular individual. This probably also assumes a specialized shop with lots of trained labor on hand.

[fusilier]

Going off of what people have mentioned in earlier threads, I believe there are references to munitions-grade, late-medieval plate armor being turned out in a matter of a few days. Though this is more the "one size fits all," mass-produced sort of armor, rather than a custom-fit harness for a particular individual. This probably also assumes a specialized shop with lots of trained labor on hand.

I think that the main issue would be having stock material at hand to make the armor from. If they have to forge the plate themselves, then I suspect it may take longer. I'm sure there's someone here a bit more knowledgeable that can explain more completely.

[Fortinbras]

You are talking about Deadliest Warrior? Isn't that the show that most people with a bit of knowledge of the subject think to be completely laughable?

Yeah, it also seems to be the most popular topic for analysis on this thread.

[Adlan]

Only untill we get some good questions to answer :D

[Crow]

Maybe this falls outside the scope of this thread, but...I'd consider a longship a weapon of sorts.

I recently got a chance to go look at an honest-to-goodness viking longship, which was really cool since I got to examine it's construction some. But what I forgot to check out was how the prow and stern were put together.

The spine of the ship is basically one piece of wood, but the prow and stern are too steeply curved, so they use additional pieces of wood and put them together to get the right shape. Like (slashes are additional pieces of wood);

\........................................../
.\.________________________./.

What I forgot to find out is how those pieces are fit and secured together. Does anybody know?

Also, for the planks which made up the sides of the ship, how did they get them to bend in order to take the proper shape?

[Aux-Ash]

Also, for the planks which made up the sides of the ship, how did they get them to bend in order to take the proper shape?

Heat, water, pressure and living wood.

Basically... the wood must still be alive, as fresh as it can be. It cannot be dry or similar. Then you immerse it in water which you heat and then slowly apply pressure and preferably a shape to bend it over. You allow the wood to slowly change it's shape. Allowing it plenty of time to adjust before you apply more pressure. Occasionally taking it out of the water to test it. Slowly, gently reaching the shape you want.
It's a living material and thus it can change shape if you treat it gently and don't rush it.

That's how one bends wood on a smaller scale anyways. I think I read somewhere that the vikings used the same or a similar method, but I'm not entirely sure.

[Xuc Xac]

I've got a question about fictional weapons. Those of us who know about the materials science and physics of weapons have all seen things in movies or games that made us think something like "That's so stupid! That would never work/be more likely to kill the wielder/be really awkward to use/be incredibly impractical/etc."

I'm just curious if you've ever seen a fictional weapon that seemed reasonable. Some fictional melee weapon that could have seen actual use (and not been just a failed experiment) in the middle ages if someone had thought of it?

[Karoht]

Well, the big thing on Pirates vs whatever is that vikings ARE pirates. And vikings are awesome.

I have no trouble whatsoever with the idea of a bunch of vikings tearing up a bunch of knights.

Neither do I.
In my swordfighting group, we occasionally cross swords with a rival viking group in town. They're cool people. If we were playing the authenticity game, I'd say our armor would keep us alive better than theirs would. Training wise, sword and shield VS sword and shield (assuming similar size) is going to be very similar no matter if it's a knight or a viking or a man at arms or peasant. It's going to come down to the skill of both combatants more than anything. Once skill/luck ensures a blow, the armor becomes a factor, but not the deciding factor.

...and I'm pretty sure that Technoviking could take all of us.

Xuc Xac wrote:
I'm just curious if you've ever seen a fictional weapon that seemed reasonable. Some fictional melee weapon that could have seen actual use (and not been just a failed experiment) in the middle ages if someone had thought of it?

The Heron Mark Sword which is from the wheel of time series if I'm not mistaken. Museum Replicas carried a representation of it. It was like a katana, with a reversed curve handle (which I can only assume is for leverage) and it featured BOTH a standard tsuba AND a crossguard style hilt. As ungainly as that sounds, it looked beautiful, and the design seemed like something that maybe (big maybe) a swordsmith in japan might have crafted as an experiment. The the reverse curve handle I don't know if that actually does anything positive or negative for a katana. I've seen a lot of wall hanger pieces and fantasy pieces sold at conventions with that handle style, and it did always make me a bit curious. It seemed a resonable design, and I could see the thought process behind it, but I couldn't speak on if it's actually an improvement or detriment to the design, or if it would merely be an aesthetic/comfort sort of choice.

Edit: On the note of the LotR weaponry, check out the special features in the Two Towers DVD. They show the stunt guys working with the elf and orc weaponry and trying to maintain fighting styles appropriate to those weapons. Really awesome part of the behind the scenes stuff.

...and I've wanted a fight capable version of King Theodin's sword (the pretty one with the horses on it) since forever. If you look carefully, you can see elements of a Roman Gladius paired flawlessly with the sort of Norse/Byzantine styles typical of the rest of the Rohan equipment.

[Spiryt]

I've got a question about fictional weapons. Those of us who know about the materials science and physics of weapons have all seen things in movies or games that made us think something like "That's so stupid! That would never work/be more likely to kill the wielder/be really awkward to use/be incredibly impractical/etc."

I'm just curious if you've ever seen a fictional weapon that seemed reasonable. Some fictional melee weapon that could have seen actual use (and not been just a failed experiment) in the middle ages if someone had thought of it?

I'm pretty sure that those elven swords from LotR, or many stuff from the film adaptation in general, could work if someone who knows his stuff made them.

Although you may want to narrow your definition of "fictional" for the purpose of your question.

[Fax Celestis]

QVEZTIN TIEM

To settle an argument: I have made a feat that allows one to bull-rush a target with a ranged weapon (such as a longbow). The argument I'm receiving is that this is 'unrealistic'. What kind of force can one assume coming off of, say, a composite longbow for a +3 str score (so between 77 and 153 lb pull, judging by medium load)? Is it enough to shove someone (assuming it doesn't go clear through)?

[Lapak]

QVEZTIN TIEM

To settle an argument: I have made a feat that allows one to bull-rush a target with a ranged weapon (such as a longbow). The argument I'm receiving is that this is 'unrealistic'. What kind of force can one assume coming off of, say, a composite longbow for a +3 str score (so between 77 and 153 lb pull, judging by medium load)? Is it enough to shove someone (assuming it doesn't go clear through)?

Good ol' action/reaction tells us no. Whatever force you're applying to the guy at the other end, you're fighting the same amount of force on your end.

In essence: any bow that pushed someone hard enough to Bull Rush them when it hit would also make a Bull Rush attempt against the wielder, more or less.

[Spiryt]

QVEZTIN TIEM

To settle an argument: I have made a feat that allows one to bull-rush a target with a ranged weapon (such as a longbow). The argument I'm receiving is that this is 'unrealistic'. What kind of force can one assume coming off of, say, a composite longbow for a +3 str score (so between 77 and 153 lb pull, judging by medium load)? Is it enough to shove someone (assuming it doesn't go clear through)?

Not really. There was pretty decisive Mythbusters episode, among other things, when they had shot 0.50 bullet from Barrett high caliber sniper rifle, into a mannequin. Mannequin had solid lump of steel inside it, so bullet was completely stopped by it. Mannequin moved back 6cm, as far as I recall.

And really any arrow in the world would have way lower kinetic energy and momentum than bullet from Barrett. Not to mention, that before energy would be used to knock someone, or whatever, it would most probably break arrow before (and similar effects) - that's it, if it was stopped really violently, such as by armor.

Simply, aside from the fact that energy and momentum is too low, arrow can't really initiate 'pushing' motion, because it's not how it behave. It would bounce off (or brake as I mentioned), because of the simple difference in masses.

So if you care for "realism" at all, arrows shouldn't really knock anyone back more than pain, shock etc. would cause them to buckle back/fall down.

Good ol' action/reaction tells us no. Whatever force you're applying to the guy at the other end, you're fighting the same amount of force on your end.

In essence: any bow that pushed someone hard enough to Bull Rush them when it hit would also make a Bull Rush attempt against the wielder, more or less.

More powerful crossbow are said to do something similar - particularly when too light bolt is fired from them - because efficiency isn't really good at very high draw weight, arms of the bow pull the rest of the crossbow forward. Using energy that hadn't been given to the bolt. I'm not sure if it's even enough to pull it out of the shooter hand at least sometimes, but it's certainly noticeable effect.

[fusilier]

QVEZTIN TIEM

To settle an argument: I have made a feat that allows one to bull-rush a target with a ranged weapon (such as a longbow). The argument I'm receiving is that this is 'unrealistic'. What kind of force can one assume coming off of, say, a composite longbow for a +3 str score (so between 77 and 153 lb pull, judging by medium load)? Is it enough to shove someone (assuming it doesn't go clear through)?

Oh boy . . .

The physics involved can be quite detailed and involve a bunch of factors, complicated by the kind of collision, and the fact that people aren't well represented as point masses. However, I would say it would be very unlikely that someone would be shoved by an arrow. The condition that should generate the most force would be if the arrow reflected directly back. In reality this would probably overcome the structural integrity of the shaft and it would shatter. But even if it did rebound I doubt the force would be sufficient to shove anybody.

@Lapak

It's not actually that simple. If person A was pushing against person B then yes. But once you let go of something momentum must be conserved. Think about a musket firing a lead bullet, and the bullet hitting a brick wall. When it hits the wall the bullet is flattened. If the same amount of force had been applied at the gun, the bullet would have been flattened inside the barrel. When the bullet is fired, it, the gun, and the person shooting, experience less force, but that force is applied over a longer amount of time, as the bullet is accelerated over the entire length of the musket barrel. When the bullet hits the wall, the wall and the bullet suffer a greater force but in a shorter amount of time . . . but now the gun and the shooter are totally out of the equation.

However, assuming that the projectile doesn't lose a significant amount of velocity (so very close range), in order for the shooter and target to experience the same force (again assuming similar masses), the target would have to move backward the same distance that the projectile was accelerated over (length of musket barrel, or draw distance of bow). There are stories of people being knocked over by musket balls, but this probably has more to do with where they are hit and their configuration (i.e. they're being knocked off balance). Likewise there are stories (and videos on youtube) of people being knocked over by the recoil of firearms. :-)

[Dienekes]

QVEZTIN TIEM

To settle an argument: I have made a feat that allows one to bull-rush a target with a ranged weapon (such as a longbow). The argument I'm receiving is that this is 'unrealistic'. What kind of force can one assume coming off of, say, a composite longbow for a +3 str score (so between 77 and 153 lb pull, judging by medium load)? Is it enough to shove someone (assuming it doesn't go clear through)?

No, but you could probably call it staggering shot or something, say the shock of the arrow forces the target to take a step back from pain. Make them only move 5 feet back maximum but still take damage and/or the amount of legs doesn't get a bonus for more legs.

[Fax Celestis]

So since I can type the feat as an Extraordinary ability (which the ability type description explicitly states EX abilities can break the laws of physics), and as long as I trade down damage for the ability to shove, I can wrangle it. Okay.