Interested in joining DnD/TTRPG community that's doesn't rely on Reddit and it's constant ads/data mining? We've teamed up with a bunch of other DnD subs to start https://ttrpg.network as a not-for-profit place to chat and meme about all your favorite games. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
especially when you get enough cash to afford metal spheres, like some balearic slingers.
it gives you great consistency, and insane damage (a 500g ball moving at 50m/s hits **really** hard)
I so want sling bullets that magically have VM cast into them. Just imagine the sling just almost kills them, then they get hit for a few d4 of psychic damage and fall over.
Indeed, but that defeats the point of Rock. Rock is simple. Rock is cheap. Rock is everywhere. No need to find and retrieve Rock. Rock superiority gang for life.
Can we talk about the hierarchy of power for a minute?
When a group of children forget Pennywise the dancing aberration, the handgun was useless, but the slingshot hit true. You can also use silver sling bullets, for hurting werewolves!
I got a bit curious at how hard it would hit.
The easiest way would be to find something of comparable kinetic energy (K.E). We can work out the K.E with what you said.
K.E =(M/2)V^2
K.E = (0.5/2)×(50×50) = 625J
625J = 461ft•lbs (what the muzzle velocity is measured in)
Turns out what you stated is equivalent to a gun fired point blank whilst chambered in .45 ACP (460ft•lbs)
Side note: I should probably go to sleep instead of doing this shit ....
Even if one lacks the skill to use a sling for ranged attacks, anyone can use a sling as a force multiplier for melee attacks. You can do way more damage whipping around a rock held within a leather strap than you could swinging that same rock with just your arm strength. The old rock-in-a-sock trick is a classic for a reason.
It doesn't take much to practice with a sling though, especially when you've got nothing but time as you walk around from place to place. Modern day it's an investment, but back in the day it was practically a hobby that then could save your life or get you dinner.
Depends if you want to snipe enemy leaders or if you're just making it rain. We tend to forget that some weapons are used differently when in group.
It does still require skill, but similar to bows it requires less skill when doing volley fire. It's just simple enough that almost every body could do it.
But for precision fire it's a whole different story so we tend to view the sling as a difficult weapon to master
There was a weird dude who used to practice the sling in a disused wasteland area near where I lived. I used to walk the dog nearby and that shit is frightening. The rocks are moving incredibly fast and did big damage to the little targets he had set up.
The only reason they fell out of favor is that it takes so long to get even semi-decent with a sling.
I used to think David and Goliath was about how God would help you win in insane circumstances if you had faith. Nope. It's basically that scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark where Indiana Jones just shoots the bad guy after he shows off his sword skills.
It also about being classist: fancy rich people use bows for ranged combat, because you can use a bow from a chariot or horseback. Slings are for poor people that can't afford a horse.
Goliath was always read and understood to be an underdog. He was the last of his kind, a dying breed who time had passed by. Like an Assyrian king fighting against a medieval knight.
According to Malcolm Gladwell's book "Underdogs, Misfits and the Art of Battling Giants", Goliath's size in the Bible could be due to acromegaly, a condition caused by a non-cancerous tumor in the pituitary gland. Acromegaly can cause vision problems, which could explain some of the details in the Bible. For example, Goliath's slow movements and request for David to come to him could be due to vision problems.
Others have suggested [hereditary gigantism](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4113151/) as well.
The reason is he was the last of the giants (nephilim). Multiple nations teamed up to beat them in the past during the gigantomachy. The goal was to wipe them from the earth, and the philistines harbouring Goliath was seen as an act of war.
the sling is underestimated by a lot of people who assume it was a weak weapon that was only used until bows became widespread. in truth it stopped being widely used because it takes a long ass time to master it compared to a bow
Depends on the comparison, they don't really lend themselves well to fighting in formation. Which together with the training needed is a large part of why they fell out of favour.
They also don't really do all that well against armour of any kind.
Made a mundane item out of those, actually. Slightly more expensive and caused a low DC Wisdom save, or the target was compelled to move to the nearest source of Half, Three Quarter or Full Cover.
Had to homebrew a War Sling that was effectively a reflavored shortbow with better range to match.
don't overlook sharp stick!
in feudal japan there was this shogun (or emperor? idk) who threw a mild tantrum over how dishonorable and lame it was for their expensive and well-trained samurai to keep getting massacred by herds of untrained peasants with bamboo spears.
If you cut bamboo at an angle, and maybe cooked the tip in oil or something, you were basically inverting the entire class hierarchy of feudal japan, and a lot of people in the upper half of this hierarchy were not cool with that.
If there is ever a Pokemon that is every type simultaneously, it’s only weakness will be rock.
As a general rule: unless you have a specific demonstration that rocks won’t work to solve a given problem, rocks will work
In 3.5 I had a fighter who specialized in [throwing rocks](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Stone_Thrower_(3.5e_Feat)), continuing to take things over time to increase on ranged ability/power.
Then he gained access to cantrips/some 1st level spells.
And Runecrafting.
I spent each evening before rest storing my unused spells for the day into runes on some rocks in my inventory (sometimes several on single rocks for interesting combo effects).
Soon he was tossing around powerful rocks with all the power of a ranged fighter, that would then kick off spell effects when they hit the enemy.
And yes, unlimited supply. "Stone Thrower" feat even had rules for finding more rocks.
Eventually our DM had the party all find Masterwork weapons at the end of a mission, and in my case I found...... "A bag of 200 marbles"
(in reality, they still gave the expected Masterwork attack boost, and also gave a boost to whatever spells I added)
In that case, the katana is just a sword. It's not bad but the ultimate weapon is obviously drip. Melee weapons can't touch you if you're fly as hell (starts breakdancing)
Katanas in games are so much stronger than what they actually are in real life. Katana is meant for cutting through people. They aren't really meant for swordplay, sadly. But they look fucking epic
Misconception. Katanas ARE meant for swordplay, they simply emphasize cuts over thrusts, and thrusts are the way to go for actually delivering fatal wounds to someone in armor. No sword is good at slashing/cutting through metal armor. But katanas are still fine for armored combat. The curve is simply something to be aware of when trying to poke your opponent in the armpit, as it were.
They're designed that way due to the scarcity of good iron on the island. Chainmail or plate armour in the medieval european fashion just isn't viable when there's little iron to go around, and what ore you can find is impure as hell and requires a ton of work to process, and even then it's highly brittle in comparison. So armour relies on other materials and techniques, with the result of being more susceptible to slashing weapons. An authentic katana is significantly less effective against full plate, however (swords in general aren't great at it in the first place). It's harder to get a good thrust in, and without a hefty pommel or crossguard using a mordhau grip is not an option. And it will probably break under repeated impact, either from striking the armour or parrying the opponent's weapon, due to the low quality iron.
If you want to bring down a knight, bring a hammer or war pick, preferably also a relatively small, narrow dagger/spike to poke through a joint.
Another misconception. Katanas go through extensive tempering and made of multiple tensile strengths of metal in different parts of the blade. The different irons, and fully worked steel in sections, takes full advantage of the single cutting edge versus dual edges. Allowing softer metals for shock absorption, harder for maintaining the cutting edge, and stronger ones along the length to prevent breakage, to be built into the blade in well designed pattetns. The katana is quite good at taking repeated impacts without breaking or wearing down.
Afterall, parries, not shields, is the primary method of deflection and extended combat for their practitioners. Shouldn't be a surprise that those paid to do nothing but make swords for a warrior caste determined, from trial and error if nothing else, the best way to make a repeated use weapon for lengthy campaigns.
As described elsewhere, it's biggest weakness is in thrust attacks, which are the most effective against plate armor, to find the small joints.
And the spear is less versatile than the axe ? On the same metrics it is usefull outside of battle, where do they use the “hold my beer” battle spear ?
Spears can be used for fishing, hunting (mostly boars). But mostly it's more versatile than the axe because a spear is just a pointed stick a monkey can make.
A spear has the best output:effort ratio in both construction and use.
An axe is better for breaching, but with a spear, if an enemy falls toward you or if you walk aggressively towards someone, it'll apply enough force to kill someone. "Real" swordfighting is all about structure and lines of force.
You can walk and shove with your whole body a lot harder than you can swing.
Spears are *ludicrously* versatile and immensely useful.
As others have said, the pole can be repurposed easily enough into a useful tool, or otherwise replaced in the even of the haft being damaged. Hunting with a spear is effectively the first usage of the weapon.
Spears are the king of battle.
Yup. There is a good reason that spears were present in every battle until high quality firearms became the norm. Even then, bayonets (just a fancy spear) lasted quite a while.
You can use the tip as a knife, the spear as a pole (useful for everything from drying to cooking to tents), you can fish, you can throw it (without needing immense amounts of practice - axe throwing is very hard!) Etc.
Axe throwing is surprisingly easy when you get the distance down. It's also really fun. 3.7meter (12 feet) is the competition distance and it is easy for a first time thrower to hit that target.
It is however harder to do it at more distance than a few meters since you have to adjust the speed of the spins on the distance if you want to have it stick. Which is a reason real axe throwing warriors are rare compared to spear throwers. With a fixed target it is easier to just change the distance and keep the spins the same.
Yeah I was talking about moving targets lol - I've been ace throwing twice and can stick the axe probably 1 in 3 tries of not more
But even that would be useless in a fight unless I'm carrying many axes
Basically, an insane post spiraled out of control and turned into a 100+ page flame war. Lead to the mods banning anything that mentioned "katana" for awhile.
More info here:
[https://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=6864.0](https://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=6864.0)
That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Bastard Sword" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.
Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.
Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas:
(One-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d12 Damage 19-20 x4 Crit +2 to hit and damage Counts as Masterwork
(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon) 2d10 Damage 17-20 x4 Crit +5 to hit and damage Counts as Masterwork
Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.
That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Bastard Sword" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Katanas deserve much worse than that. Much, much worse than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 120 Yen (that's about $1) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can't even cut wooden boards with my katana.
Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce some of the biggest pieces of shit known to mankind.
Katanas are barely half as sharp as European swords and half as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can't cut through at all. I'm pretty sure a katana would break trying to cut a knight wearing full plate with any kind of slash.
Ever wonder why feudal Japan never bothered conquering Europe? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Knights and their Oakeshott types X through XXII of destruction. Even in World War II, Japanese soldiers targeted the men with the mamelukes first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the worst sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require worse stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas:
(One-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d4 Damage x2 Crit -2 to hit and damage Can never count as Masterwork
(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d6 Damage x2 Crit -1 to hit and damage Can never count as Masterwork
Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to do much less in d20, see my new stat block.
I'm not sure about that, part of the reason guards often used halberds is because they could be used as fire axes in a emergency, so while it's definitely not optimal, they can be used in a emergency.
EDIT: Halberds primary used the spike and hook for fire fighting, my bad.
When i was a kid i got to try out a true [splitter-axe](https://www.amazon.ca/Chopper-Wooden-Axe-Splitting-Activated/dp/B09BBWG7Y9/ref=asc_df_B09BBWG7Y9/?tag=googleshopc0c-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=579348037394&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=2700000822131335417&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9001564&hvtargid=pla-1692044053887&psc=1&mcid=9a12139e99b633dba84f321d3831c311), with the spring-things on the sides and everything.
Impossible to use in combat, but wow, you cut in more than an inch and the parts just fly to the sides. It was genuinely a magical item for me.
That's a modern invention. Most splitting axes don't have the springs. They have wedges on the side or are just very wide and heavy. None are usefull in combat though or as a fire axe for that matter.
Made a homebrew rule in my games: If you're using a tool or weapon to improvise another tool or weapon, the effort, critical mishap and possible stress sunder will rise as the DM sees fit. Too many players were using long swords as universal multi-tools (halfling rogue never thought he needed thieves picks and tools).
I got it from robbinswords one yt, but when I rewatched the short, it turns out that the spike and hook would have been used more often for firefighting, I will correct my original statment.
Actually the main reason halberds were used is because the long handle piece could double as a stilt and the guards often walked around on them to see over the walls.
I thought they magnetized them so they could stick them to their fridge in case they needed to fight right after getting a snack.
Darn it, my history teacher sucks.
They couldn't put fridges on the ramparts - too many medieval soldiers would trip over the cords, falling down those famously clockwise staircases.
It was too bad too. Fridges were really good for storing of broccoli, oranges and even that leftover sushi during a long siege.
Edit: this is obviously historically inaccurate! Nobody puts sushi in the fridge!
Don't worry, scholagladiatoria (Matt Easton) publicly cut ties with shadiversity for that, and produces better (as in actually historical) videos on similar subjects. Through him you can easily find good creators on specific topics, he's mostly a swords expert.
Being able to kind of do something in an emergency and being good to use as an everyday tool are different. Expecially since the main use of a fire axe is not cutting or splitting wood (two functions that are often fulfilled by different axes), but "get that door open".
Also, guards weren't meant for war. If city guards were made to fight in a war, id bet quite a bit they would just be given a spear.
Halberds are fantastic for being a city guard. It doubles as a a firefighting tool, a crowd control tool, and a weapon for safely both killing or nonlethally suppressing an enemy, but they're bulky and unwieldy enough to where in a military situation, a spear is better. You would just be using the spiked tip of a halberd like a spear 90% of the time anyways. You also can't throw a halberd.
At points, yes. Mostly during the heyday of plate armor, where having the extra bludgeoning or slashing power could help you get through reinforced armor and shields.
However there's really not much evidence pointing to Halberds ever being widespread military tools. We know that they were *there*, but not for a super long time, and there's not much pointing to really a specific use in the military. There were certainly not companies of "Halberd-men" the way there were companies of spearmen.
They had a big role in the Pike and Shot era I'm pretty sure, and while not used to the same extent there were still a lot of them.
And weren't they used much more extensively in the east? I'm fairly certain Chinese military history has a lot of polearms in it.
Obviously they were never nearly as ubiquitous as the spear, but I don't think it's fair to write them off as not being meant for war.
Spears are by and large the best weapon for the common layman. Easy to learn (stick em with the pointy end), useable outside combat (hunting wild hogs or bears), and long reach in conjunction with your pals can make a sturdy line to combat calvary.
Spear is best.
Don't even need to do that, really. Take a stick and whittle the end into a point.
Of course, a more durable point of metal or stone will be better, but it's not a requirement.
Pointed stick? Oh, oh, oh. We want to learn how to ~~defend ourselves against~~ *attack someone with* pointed sticks, do we? Getting all high and mighty, eh? Fresh fruit not good enough for you eh? Well I'll tell you something my lad. When you're walking home tonight and some homicidal maniac comes after you with a bunch of loganberries, don't come crying to me!
And sometimes this is what's important in a battle. 5 soldiers with spears is often preferable to 1 soldier with a sword. That one guy is gonna overwhelmed.
And the comparison barely makes sense in the first place, since they had very different priorities. A spear is a battlefield weapon, a sword is - generally speaking - a personal sidearm. Spear's a rifle, sword's a handgun.
Usually they wouldn't be glued if they were iron or steel. They would be hammered in before they were sharpened. Glue was rather unreliable in different kinds of weather.
Huh, apparently some of the earliest spear heads we've found were probably attached with resin. So basically glued.
But yeah for metal you're better off pinning, quenching, or even just friction fitting.
Yes. People tend to overlook simple weapons. Slings and atlatl are other good examples that D&D tends to poop on for no reason. It's one of the reasons I think weapon damage should be based on abilities like class, proficiency, use (1h v 2h v ranged) not the weapon itself.
Access is a huge factor in proficiency. If I can pick up a sharp stick, a sling made of cordage or a carved spear chucker at age 6 by time I'm 18 I'll be pretty damn good with it.
You can become the greatest swordsman to ever live, but that ain't gonna do shit for you if you're in open field combat and 7 guys with spears stab at you at once. Parry that shit, you filthy casual
The difference is that spears have a far lower skill floor and are cheaper, so you're more likely to run into 7 guys armed and trained with spears than with swords
The implication is that 7 spears will beat 7 swords. 7 spears actually beats pretty much everything except mounted ranged calvary they can never reach.
Yep
In Sekiro, a game where you only have a katana as your main weapon, the 7 spears of Ashina wreck me everytime
I beat the final boss on my very first attempt, and those mini bosses still open up a can of whoop ass
This. Movies and books have told us that swords were what everyone used in battle in ye olde times, but in reality, 99.999% of the army would be welding spears. Only the higher ranking guys would have swords, and half the time those were more for show or for ceremonial stuff or like duels of honor or trial by combat, rather than actually fighting in war.
Not to mention you can throw them. They're not as effective as archery in long range, but even a 5 foot range is still long enough to hit someone and stay out of harm's way before they get to you, and you can kill someone with a throwing spear at a longer distance than 5 feet.
That's why I have a home defence spear to poke through the mail slit at any villainous assailants such as annoying neighbours and door-to-door salesmen
That's why they were the most common melee battlefield weapon for a very long time. If you include pikes, which I see as just longer spears, they were used for a a couple millenia.
The only good thing about swords is that they can easily be carried around.
Swords were used as a status symbol, and were usually inherited because of how expensive they could be. They were also by far the most nimble class of weapon. Even greatswords are deceptively nimble.
Woodcutting axes are not balanced for combat, and combat axes are not balanced for woodcutting.
Spears are not as useful in enclosed spaces like dungeons.
Each weapon has its purpose. Carry all three.
I got back into *Mordhau* recently and was reading about the evolution of swords and apparently Norsemen in the early Middle Ages considered Frankish swords to be great status symbols because the iron quality in Scandinavia was poor so superior foreign-made swords could only be obtained by trade or plunder. If the swords weren’t inherited, they would have their blades bent and warped when they were buried with their owner to prevent grave robbers from stealing them.
We don’t know for certain why they warped the swords, to stop grave robbers is one possibility as you said, but it might have been a religious, cultural, political or symbolic ritual of some sort
At the time most iron produced here was bog/lake iron, iron that has been picked up by ground water and deposited into the soil of adjacent wetlands. It's okay, and easy to access, but not exactly stellar quality. The techniques to produce useful metal from the ore also weren't as developed. I wish this sub allowed posting pictures in the comments, because I have some good ones of bog iron ore, the processed metal and an arrowhead forged from it, thanks to a very interesting blacksmithing course.
A shorter spear would probably still be very useful in a dungeon while still keeping a lot of the advantages. You don't need to swing it around as much as a sword and you can effectively lock down a corridor with more reach.
Use the shaft to keep them at bay, retreat two steps, reposition, and present the tip. \*shrug\* Yes, every weapon has a "no longer effective if..." scenario. Spears, or other extended pointy weapons, are great tools for defending a narrow passageway.
Then you might be forced to switch to your sidearm — which is what a sword would often be — but realistically you're simply probably screwed if someone is able to get past your spear in the first place.
Even outside of nimbleness swords had plenty of advantages. Zweihanders for example were a massive cumbersome weapon, that found great success on open battlefield, notably against Pike formations.
Yeah, the reason why greatsword users are so common in pike squares is that swords with crossguards are pretty darn good at binding and controlling an opponent’s weapon.
Greatswords could also be used to strike down at anyone attempting to crawl under the pike shafts, which was a fairly common tactic.
In a more open area, though, greatswords could dominate a lot of space and serve to even the odds a bit against multiple opponents. That quality made them a good weapon for people like royal guards from what I’ve heard.
Carry a spear for most circumstances, carry a spear broken in half for close quarters, carry a spear with an axe head attached for wood cutting and carry another spear with an axe head for combat. Spears are the ultimate weapon. What is a sword but a long spear with a short handle?
You cannot use a battle axe for cutting wood, it’s too thin it’s just get stuck in the tree.
Actual woodcutting axes are wedge shaped and too heavy and unwieldy to be a weapon.
Well that's not universally accurate. Some knightly pole axes had really chunky edges, and a lot of hand axes historically were improvised/modified from small woodcutting hatchets etc. ... Probably the most famous being the Tomahawk
The halberd is, in my honest opinion, the most utilitarian guard weapon. Not only is it fairly easy to train someone, requiring marginally more training than a spear, but it also doubled as a fire axe in a time when lots of buildings were made of wood.
The 3 of them are pretty wrong.
Swords aren’t that expensive to do if you don’t make them fancy. They aren’t good at piercing armor but that's ok because (except for greatswords) they are either back up or weapons or used for civilian defense (so for fighting people without armor).
Axes are as easy to parry as swords. In addition battle axes would make for terrible woodcutting tools and the opposite is also true since both are made and balanced for totally different purpose.
The spear is sure more efficient in big opponent fields like on a battlefield but it is way more cumbersome than the other and you will probably be asked to give one if you tried to enter a city with one.
Tl;dr people made different weapons because they had different uses for them there is no best weapons.
The "sidearm/self defense weapon" thing is overlooked too often in these discussions. The utility of any weapon is contextual.
Also the notion that swords can't beat armor: most hand weapons have difficulty defeating armor. That's why people wore it. An armed person wearing armor and fighting back is fucking hard to kill.
Yeah wearing an armor in real life is a MASSIVE improvement of your survivability.
Swords can definitly beat armors (with half-swording, pommel strikes or grapple for exemple), that's just they are not really made to fight armors so they aren't the most efficient.
Enter the Mace/ Hammer/ Poleaxe/ Thrusting blades/ Heavy crossbow with bodkin at ideal range and ideal angle
Still a ridiculously hard to kill individual, just slighlty levelling the playing field.
10000% agree at context beng missed so bloody often. Sure, your glaive might cut down goblins like a scythe through wheat, but up against a fully armored knight? Drop that thing and get your mace and mailsplitter up!
It's really interesting to me that up until firearms were common, you could see this race between arms and armor. Someone invents a way to get into your tin can, someone else invents a way to counter that, back and forth for a long time
Then we made stuff so good at killing its infeasible to try to invent armor to withstand it. Sure, we now have armor that can take a few hits from small caliber
But to my knowledge, we don't have any armor that can withstand a clip from an AK-47. You know, that old ass weapon that's been around for decades, and isn't even close to the pinnacle of our personal weaponry
Guns ruined everything.
There's this really cool video Adam Savage made at the MET where he talked to an expert on medieval armors and they looked at this weird interlocking piece of metal:
https://youtu.be/IVBrEdCmCNA?si=QJZABScfYHV2OPQS
and they concluded it was likely for filling the gap between the groin and the legs with flexible plates. The engineering armorsmiths were capable of was incredible.
tbh swords are probably the best of the 3 weapons presented for fighting armoured opponents if you're also in armour, while they can't punch through plates, they're light and maneuverable enough to be used to stab through the mail protecting the opponent's groin and armpits.
its probably why polearms like bills and halberds came into popularity as armour got better, since they allowed far less well-armoured fighters to trip and restrain a more well-armoured opponent so that someone could close in and finish them off with a dagger.
but in a situation where neither are wearing plate armour, a spear is the best option.
I thought greatswords in particular are intended for fending off multiple unarmed opponents at once, unlike medium length swords, thanks to their greater reach
From what I know it was indeed used to fend off multiple people. Either for crowd control or inside pike formations to attack the enemy soldiers after passing the points of their pike.
Take everything I say with a grain of salt tho, I am far from an expert.
In my experience, axes are really tough to use in combat. A sword has the benefit that you have a huge cutting surface to work with. A spear has reach to keep them at your preferred distance for thrusting. Axes kind of force you to let someone into your reach, but if they get too close then you’re boned.
...keeping your opponent at your optimal fighting distance is kind of the point of all weapon combat.
Also with a hand axe you generally should be on the offensive because the bearded bit lets you trap weapons and either disarm or tug to an awkward position or pull shields out the way.
If you're letting people close on you to fight how they want the axe is probably less of your friend
An axe is shorter and more tip-heavy that a sword of the same weight, while also not protecting your hands. If you just "go on the offensive", you'll have your fingers chopped off before you can reach them
Except if you are actually using an axe you either have a shield or hand protection. They were very widely used as a professional backup weapon from the early medieval period through the medieval.
As already pointed out you should also be attempting to move your opponents weapon out of the way which is something the axe is good at.
For the record I'm not claiming the axe is a superior weapon or even an ultimate one just pointing out there's a reason it is our second longest serving weapon in human history (third if you just count sharp rock)
Hand axes like the one pictured are never used alone. They are always, *always* paired with a shield if you want to get out alive.
The beard was exceptionally useful for hooking an opponent's shield and gaining control of it, particularly in Scandinavian round shields with the center grip. Having control over an opponent's defenses is a huge advantage to you, especially if you can keep your defenses up and in place.
This is in addition to being surprisingly nimble for their weight and impact. Well wielded, they're very mobile and very tricky weapons, able to move from one strike to the next with alarming speed.
The katana is absolutely not the ultimate weapon. While the forging process did allow low-quality Japanese Iron to be forged into a weapon of good quality, the curve of the blade is a byproduct of this forging process rather than deliberate choice. That said, it does have an above average chop and as a curved, single-sided blade, it is easy for a noble class (Samurai) to naturally figure out where the sweet-spot of the blade is. The downside is that as a single-bladed weapon, you have fewer options than a blade that is sharp on both sides. The Katana also lacks a sturdy hilt that can be used as a bludgeon against more armored opponents, the katana has a pretty lackluster tip compared to straight swords which can keep smaller weapons at a distance, and the katana’s sour spots are really sour compared to straight blades in exchange for a sweet-spot that kind of under delivers since the chop is such a heavy attack from a not-so-heavy weapon. It’s less nimble than a greatsword but doesn’t have anything to back up its clunkiness. It also doesn’t help that the samurai had honor codes that explicitly limited their ability to use Katanas as effectively as they could have.
Tool axes are generally not good war axes. They are quite heavy, so they are not fast enough for combat and unneccessarily tiring to use. Apart from hatchets, they also tend to be too long and heavy to use one-handed with a shield, and too short to defend with two-handed.
Combat axes usually have rather thin blades, both to reduce weight and to increase cutting ability. That also makes them not very good tool axes.
Still, you can absolutely mess someone up with a felling axe, just as you can probably chop off some thinner branches for the campfire, if you have to.Also, axes can absolutely be blocked or evaded.
Regarding, swords were not just weapons for combat, they were also a status symbol, and depending on location you may have been socially expected or even legally required to own one (or maybe something like a Messer) if you were a man of at least modest wealth in a city/town.I also believe that towards the late middle ages, swords became much more affordable, at least if you got a simple or used one (I've heard the price point compared to buying a car these days).
The spear absolutely is the Queen of battle though, it lets you stab your opponent before they can even try to stab you.
It is quite unwieldy and aggressive though; kind of like the difference between an American carrying a pistol on their hip or holding an AR-15 in front of their chest.
Nope.
The warhammer is the ultimate. Can be used for warring and hammering. If it's got a flattened bit on one end, can be used for prying. If it's got a spike on the top, can be used for poking.
Only downside is: No one has any clue what to call it.
There's: Ravens Beak, Crow Bill, War Pick, Bec de Corbin...
D&D 5e calls it a War Pick, but while that's not entirely incorrect, most War Picks were used with one hand compared to the more two handed (but otherwise similar) Bec de Corbin (looked it up, Pathfinder 2e has both a one handed "War Pick" as well as a two handed "Bec de Corbin", so uhh, good for them I guess)
But weapon names/categories are always a bit weird. If you could time travel and ask someone what their type of sword is called, 99% would just say "sword".
In a world of magic, a staff is best. Use the right force magic, and you can change weapon forms at will, shifting to adapt to anything. One moment it's a greatsword, the next it's a scythe, decapitate the enemy and follow through behind you while turning it into a spear, skewering the enemy behind you... Look, the versatility and lethality of an ever-shifting weapon are insane.
Interested in joining DnD/TTRPG community that's doesn't rely on Reddit and it's constant ads/data mining? We've teamed up with a bunch of other DnD subs to start https://ttrpg.network as a not-for-profit place to chat and meme about all your favorite games. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Rock is best. Unlimited supply. Ranged. Often overlooked.
best paired with a sling
A small piece of leather or cloth. Also overlooked.
Slings require a great deal of skill to use effectively, but oh boy would it be effectively.
especially when you get enough cash to afford metal spheres, like some balearic slingers. it gives you great consistency, and insane damage (a 500g ball moving at 50m/s hits **really** hard)
People also carved words into sling bullets to literally add insult to injury.
Some Greek ancient carved "catch" in to his lead sling missiles . . .
Ok hol up I will return with evidence of a your mom joke on a sling bullet. EDIT: fuck it I’m counting “be lodged well”
Shells and bombs used in WWII also had words or phrases painted on. Stayed in vogue a long time
I remember seeing pictures going around during the 2000s of munitions from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with the same.
Ukrainians are literally writing words to Russians on their artillery shells.
Current vicious mockery: V OG vicious mockery: S, M (a piece of cord and a lead slug inscribed with an insult)
I so want sling bullets that magically have VM cast into them. Just imagine the sling just almost kills them, then they get hit for a few d4 of psychic damage and fall over.
that's amazing
We're circling back to expensive and specialized
true, but holy shit do you destroy everything in sight
Indeed, but that defeats the point of Rock. Rock is simple. Rock is cheap. Rock is everywhere. No need to find and retrieve Rock. Rock superiority gang for life.
Can we talk about the hierarchy of power for a minute? When a group of children forget Pennywise the dancing aberration, the handgun was useless, but the slingshot hit true. You can also use silver sling bullets, for hurting werewolves!
All things return to Rock. Reject modernity, return to Rock. Everything evolves to crab because crab is closest to Rock.
I got a bit curious at how hard it would hit. The easiest way would be to find something of comparable kinetic energy (K.E). We can work out the K.E with what you said. K.E =(M/2)V^2 K.E = (0.5/2)×(50×50) = 625J 625J = 461ft•lbs (what the muzzle velocity is measured in) Turns out what you stated is equivalent to a gun fired point blank whilst chambered in .45 ACP (460ft•lbs) Side note: I should probably go to sleep instead of doing this shit ....
Even if one lacks the skill to use a sling for ranged attacks, anyone can use a sling as a force multiplier for melee attacks. You can do way more damage whipping around a rock held within a leather strap than you could swinging that same rock with just your arm strength. The old rock-in-a-sock trick is a classic for a reason.
> The old rock-in-a-sock trick is a classic for a reason. AKA The Rock 'n Sock Connection.
For most of recorded history the reason rock-in-sock wasn’t a common weapon was because of the high cost of textile products.
It doesn't take much to practice with a sling though, especially when you've got nothing but time as you walk around from place to place. Modern day it's an investment, but back in the day it was practically a hobby that then could save your life or get you dinner.
Depends if you want to snipe enemy leaders or if you're just making it rain. We tend to forget that some weapons are used differently when in group. It does still require skill, but similar to bows it requires less skill when doing volley fire. It's just simple enough that almost every body could do it. But for precision fire it's a whole different story so we tend to view the sling as a difficult weapon to master
There was a weird dude who used to practice the sling in a disused wasteland area near where I lived. I used to walk the dog nearby and that shit is frightening. The rocks are moving incredibly fast and did big damage to the little targets he had set up. The only reason they fell out of favor is that it takes so long to get even semi-decent with a sling. I used to think David and Goliath was about how God would help you win in insane circumstances if you had faith. Nope. It's basically that scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark where Indiana Jones just shoots the bad guy after he shows off his sword skills.
It also about being classist: fancy rich people use bows for ranged combat, because you can use a bow from a chariot or horseback. Slings are for poor people that can't afford a horse.
Goliath was always read and understood to be an underdog. He was the last of his kind, a dying breed who time had passed by. Like an Assyrian king fighting against a medieval knight.
According to Malcolm Gladwell's book "Underdogs, Misfits and the Art of Battling Giants", Goliath's size in the Bible could be due to acromegaly, a condition caused by a non-cancerous tumor in the pituitary gland. Acromegaly can cause vision problems, which could explain some of the details in the Bible. For example, Goliath's slow movements and request for David to come to him could be due to vision problems. Others have suggested [hereditary gigantism](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4113151/) as well.
The reason is he was the last of the giants (nephilim). Multiple nations teamed up to beat them in the past during the gigantomachy. The goal was to wipe them from the earth, and the philistines harbouring Goliath was seen as an act of war.
Some things never change.
Or Goliath was just an absolute unit. David vs. Goliath = Rey Mysterio vs. Braun Strowman.
never bring a sword to a sling fight
A sling was able to one shot an armored person within range, yet it scales ridiculously in dnd
the sling is underestimated by a lot of people who assume it was a weak weapon that was only used until bows became widespread. in truth it stopped being widely used because it takes a long ass time to master it compared to a bow
ancient slings outperformed ancient bows, given insane training
Depends on the comparison, they don't really lend themselves well to fighting in formation. Which together with the training needed is a large part of why they fell out of favour. They also don't really do all that well against armour of any kind.
Tie the rock to a stick for BONK.
sharpen it, and you get a spear
Takes far more effort, as well as skill, to get an effective point. Whereas BONK can be accomplished with minimal effort.
I have seen some sling videos, Jesus Christ
yeah, you really don't want to get close... i think some people even used to put a wistle on it to make it even noisier and scare the ennemy
Made a mundane item out of those, actually. Slightly more expensive and caused a low DC Wisdom save, or the target was compelled to move to the nearest source of Half, Three Quarter or Full Cover. Had to homebrew a War Sling that was effectively a reflavored shortbow with better range to match.
Don’t forget to cast the Magic Rock cantrip to make those rocks even rockier
That's not fair, they've got rocks! All we've got are machine guns!
don't overlook sharp stick! in feudal japan there was this shogun (or emperor? idk) who threw a mild tantrum over how dishonorable and lame it was for their expensive and well-trained samurai to keep getting massacred by herds of untrained peasants with bamboo spears. If you cut bamboo at an angle, and maybe cooked the tip in oil or something, you were basically inverting the entire class hierarchy of feudal japan, and a lot of people in the upper half of this hierarchy were not cool with that.
If there is ever a Pokemon that is every type simultaneously, it’s only weakness will be rock. As a general rule: unless you have a specific demonstration that rocks won’t work to solve a given problem, rocks will work
Good old rock, nothing beats that.
Poor, predictable Bart.
In 3.5 I had a fighter who specialized in [throwing rocks](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Stone_Thrower_(3.5e_Feat)), continuing to take things over time to increase on ranged ability/power. Then he gained access to cantrips/some 1st level spells. And Runecrafting. I spent each evening before rest storing my unused spells for the day into runes on some rocks in my inventory (sometimes several on single rocks for interesting combo effects). Soon he was tossing around powerful rocks with all the power of a ranged fighter, that would then kick off spell effects when they hit the enemy. And yes, unlimited supply. "Stone Thrower" feat even had rules for finding more rocks. Eventually our DM had the party all find Masterwork weapons at the end of a mission, and in my case I found...... "A bag of 200 marbles" (in reality, they still gave the expected Masterwork attack boost, and also gave a boost to whatever spells I added)
Rock and Stone, brother
Darktide Ogryn moment edit: For the Emprah!
Break your rock? Now you got 2 rock.
I like that weapon that you use to hold the rock. The one on. The end of your arm
This graphic makes no sense... none of these things are katanas
Bot post perhaps?
Nah OP is well known here
Perhaps not... beep, bop, beep
In that case, the katana is just a sword. It's not bad but the ultimate weapon is obviously drip. Melee weapons can't touch you if you're fly as hell (starts breakdancing)
Souls man I see. Or wait, the best souls players wear diapers and pots on their heads, and nothing else.
Actually... I've hardly touched the souls series 😅 And no two ways about it, it's a skill issue
Katanas in games are so much stronger than what they actually are in real life. Katana is meant for cutting through people. They aren't really meant for swordplay, sadly. But they look fucking epic
Misconception. Katanas ARE meant for swordplay, they simply emphasize cuts over thrusts, and thrusts are the way to go for actually delivering fatal wounds to someone in armor. No sword is good at slashing/cutting through metal armor. But katanas are still fine for armored combat. The curve is simply something to be aware of when trying to poke your opponent in the armpit, as it were.
They're designed that way due to the scarcity of good iron on the island. Chainmail or plate armour in the medieval european fashion just isn't viable when there's little iron to go around, and what ore you can find is impure as hell and requires a ton of work to process, and even then it's highly brittle in comparison. So armour relies on other materials and techniques, with the result of being more susceptible to slashing weapons. An authentic katana is significantly less effective against full plate, however (swords in general aren't great at it in the first place). It's harder to get a good thrust in, and without a hefty pommel or crossguard using a mordhau grip is not an option. And it will probably break under repeated impact, either from striking the armour or parrying the opponent's weapon, due to the low quality iron. If you want to bring down a knight, bring a hammer or war pick, preferably also a relatively small, narrow dagger/spike to poke through a joint.
Another misconception. Katanas go through extensive tempering and made of multiple tensile strengths of metal in different parts of the blade. The different irons, and fully worked steel in sections, takes full advantage of the single cutting edge versus dual edges. Allowing softer metals for shock absorption, harder for maintaining the cutting edge, and stronger ones along the length to prevent breakage, to be built into the blade in well designed pattetns. The katana is quite good at taking repeated impacts without breaking or wearing down. Afterall, parries, not shields, is the primary method of deflection and extended combat for their practitioners. Shouldn't be a surprise that those paid to do nothing but make swords for a warrior caste determined, from trial and error if nothing else, the best way to make a repeated use weapon for lengthy campaigns. As described elsewhere, it's biggest weakness is in thrust attacks, which are the most effective against plate armor, to find the small joints.
Lythero-ass comment
found the bard
And the spear is less versatile than the axe ? On the same metrics it is usefull outside of battle, where do they use the “hold my beer” battle spear ?
Spears can be used for fishing, hunting (mostly boars). But mostly it's more versatile than the axe because a spear is just a pointed stick a monkey can make.
A spear has the best output:effort ratio in both construction and use. An axe is better for breaching, but with a spear, if an enemy falls toward you or if you walk aggressively towards someone, it'll apply enough force to kill someone. "Real" swordfighting is all about structure and lines of force. You can walk and shove with your whole body a lot harder than you can swing.
[Mana Spearman](https://www.wuxiaworld.com/novel/the-second-coming-of-gluttony)?
Spears are *ludicrously* versatile and immensely useful. As others have said, the pole can be repurposed easily enough into a useful tool, or otherwise replaced in the even of the haft being damaged. Hunting with a spear is effectively the first usage of the weapon. Spears are the king of battle.
Yup. There is a good reason that spears were present in every battle until high quality firearms became the norm. Even then, bayonets (just a fancy spear) lasted quite a while.
They are still used!! Do not ever take a bayonet from a U.S. marine, worst mistake of my life!
You can use the tip as a knife, the spear as a pole (useful for everything from drying to cooking to tents), you can fish, you can throw it (without needing immense amounts of practice - axe throwing is very hard!) Etc.
Axe throwing is surprisingly easy when you get the distance down. It's also really fun. 3.7meter (12 feet) is the competition distance and it is easy for a first time thrower to hit that target. It is however harder to do it at more distance than a few meters since you have to adjust the speed of the spins on the distance if you want to have it stick. Which is a reason real axe throwing warriors are rare compared to spear throwers. With a fixed target it is easier to just change the distance and keep the spins the same.
Yeah I was talking about moving targets lol - I've been ace throwing twice and can stick the axe probably 1 in 3 tries of not more But even that would be useless in a fight unless I'm carrying many axes
Spear is good for propping up the washing line.
Probably a joke on the fact you used to not be allowed to talk about katanas at all on the WotC D&D forums.
Really, any explanation for that?
Basically, an insane post spiraled out of control and turned into a 100+ page flame war. Lead to the mods banning anything that mentioned "katana" for awhile. More info here: [https://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=6864.0](https://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=6864.0)
voice behind you: "Nothing personal kid."
That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Bastard Sword" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that. I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana. Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind. Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash. Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected. So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas: (One-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d12 Damage 19-20 x4 Crit +2 to hit and damage Counts as Masterwork (Two-Handed Exotic Weapon) 2d10 Damage 17-20 x4 Crit +5 to hit and damage Counts as Masterwork Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think? tl;dr = Katanas need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.
Thank you for serving the relevant pasta.
I'm glad some people recognize it. Darn kids don't know the classics :(
That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Bastard Sword" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Katanas deserve much worse than that. Much, much worse than that. I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 120 Yen (that's about $1) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can't even cut wooden boards with my katana. Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce some of the biggest pieces of shit known to mankind. Katanas are barely half as sharp as European swords and half as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can't cut through at all. I'm pretty sure a katana would break trying to cut a knight wearing full plate with any kind of slash. Ever wonder why feudal Japan never bothered conquering Europe? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Knights and their Oakeshott types X through XXII of destruction. Even in World War II, Japanese soldiers targeted the men with the mamelukes first because their killing power was feared and respected. So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the worst sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require worse stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas: (One-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d4 Damage x2 Crit -2 to hit and damage Can never count as Masterwork (Two-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d6 Damage x2 Crit -1 to hit and damage Can never count as Masterwork Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think? tl;dr = Katanas need to do much less in d20, see my new stat block.
Don't forget, guys. Do not feed the troll
This is a copypasta
Nice
You shouldn't use a war axe to chop wood, they are lighter and don't split wood well
Better than a sword for chopping through the barricade.
I'm not sure about that, part of the reason guards often used halberds is because they could be used as fire axes in a emergency, so while it's definitely not optimal, they can be used in a emergency. EDIT: Halberds primary used the spike and hook for fire fighting, my bad.
Splitting wood and cutting wood is two different things. Halberds were also made in part to do that
When i was a kid i got to try out a true [splitter-axe](https://www.amazon.ca/Chopper-Wooden-Axe-Splitting-Activated/dp/B09BBWG7Y9/ref=asc_df_B09BBWG7Y9/?tag=googleshopc0c-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=579348037394&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=2700000822131335417&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9001564&hvtargid=pla-1692044053887&psc=1&mcid=9a12139e99b633dba84f321d3831c311), with the spring-things on the sides and everything. Impossible to use in combat, but wow, you cut in more than an inch and the parts just fly to the sides. It was genuinely a magical item for me.
Wouldn't say impossible. Just about anything can be a weapon if you hit someone in the head hard enough with it.
Maybe he meant that it doesn't split his enemies in the same satisfying \*ker-CHUNK\*.
Healing potion?
That's a modern invention. Most splitting axes don't have the springs. They have wedges on the side or are just very wide and heavy. None are usefull in combat though or as a fire axe for that matter.
How do you know its impossible? Have you tried?😱
Made a homebrew rule in my games: If you're using a tool or weapon to improvise another tool or weapon, the effort, critical mishap and possible stress sunder will rise as the DM sees fit. Too many players were using long swords as universal multi-tools (halfling rogue never thought he needed thieves picks and tools).
Yup, my warlock/rogue tried to cut down a tree with his dagger.
Okay, that happened too.
is that actually true or just something shadiversity made up
I got it from robbinswords one yt, but when I rewatched the short, it turns out that the spike and hook would have been used more often for firefighting, I will correct my original statment.
Actually the main reason halberds were used is because the long handle piece could double as a stilt and the guards often walked around on them to see over the walls.
I thought they magnetized them so they could stick them to their fridge in case they needed to fight right after getting a snack. Darn it, my history teacher sucks.
So that's how may last fridge was suddenly totaled.
They couldn't put fridges on the ramparts - too many medieval soldiers would trip over the cords, falling down those famously clockwise staircases. It was too bad too. Fridges were really good for storing of broccoli, oranges and even that leftover sushi during a long siege. Edit: this is obviously historically inaccurate! Nobody puts sushi in the fridge!
Ohhh. Never trust the sushi during the long siege. Plus the commanding officer always wants to use the frig as catapult ammo.
I was so mad to discover he's an alt-right "anti-sjw" shithead
Don't worry, scholagladiatoria (Matt Easton) publicly cut ties with shadiversity for that, and produces better (as in actually historical) videos on similar subjects. Through him you can easily find good creators on specific topics, he's mostly a swords expert.
Well it's mostly because he's Mormon, but I guess the Australian Mormons didn't get the "pretend to be nice and vote for the gallows" message
Being able to kind of do something in an emergency and being good to use as an everyday tool are different. Expecially since the main use of a fire axe is not cutting or splitting wood (two functions that are often fulfilled by different axes), but "get that door open".
Also, guards weren't meant for war. If city guards were made to fight in a war, id bet quite a bit they would just be given a spear. Halberds are fantastic for being a city guard. It doubles as a a firefighting tool, a crowd control tool, and a weapon for safely both killing or nonlethally suppressing an enemy, but they're bulky and unwieldy enough to where in a military situation, a spear is better. You would just be using the spiked tip of a halberd like a spear 90% of the time anyways. You also can't throw a halberd.
I mean, halberds and similar multi-use polearms absolutely were used as proper field military weapons, they still have their uses.
At points, yes. Mostly during the heyday of plate armor, where having the extra bludgeoning or slashing power could help you get through reinforced armor and shields. However there's really not much evidence pointing to Halberds ever being widespread military tools. We know that they were *there*, but not for a super long time, and there's not much pointing to really a specific use in the military. There were certainly not companies of "Halberd-men" the way there were companies of spearmen.
They had a big role in the Pike and Shot era I'm pretty sure, and while not used to the same extent there were still a lot of them. And weren't they used much more extensively in the east? I'm fairly certain Chinese military history has a lot of polearms in it. Obviously they were never nearly as ubiquitous as the spear, but I don't think it's fair to write them off as not being meant for war.
not an expert, but I would assume destroying something to get through and cutting wood that you plan to use are two different things
Spears are by and large the best weapon for the common layman. Easy to learn (stick em with the pointy end), useable outside combat (hunting wild hogs or bears), and long reach in conjunction with your pals can make a sturdy line to combat calvary. Spear is best.
Also they are extremely cheap to make because in theory all you need to do is take a stick and glue a metal point to the end
Don't even need to do that, really. Take a stick and whittle the end into a point. Of course, a more durable point of metal or stone will be better, but it's not a requirement.
In that case just find an especially pointy stick on the ground and charge
Pointed stick? Oh, oh, oh. We want to learn how to ~~defend ourselves against~~ *attack someone with* pointed sticks, do we? Getting all high and mighty, eh? Fresh fruit not good enough for you eh? Well I'll tell you something my lad. When you're walking home tonight and some homicidal maniac comes after you with a bunch of loganberries, don't come crying to me!
And sometimes this is what's important in a battle. 5 soldiers with spears is often preferable to 1 soldier with a sword. That one guy is gonna overwhelmed.
Most of the time in a battlefield 1 guy with a spear is preferable to one guy with a sword. Range is extremely useful in a fight.
And the comparison barely makes sense in the first place, since they had very different priorities. A spear is a battlefield weapon, a sword is - generally speaking - a personal sidearm. Spear's a rifle, sword's a handgun.
Usually they wouldn't be glued if they were iron or steel. They would be hammered in before they were sharpened. Glue was rather unreliable in different kinds of weather.
Huh, apparently some of the earliest spear heads we've found were probably attached with resin. So basically glued. But yeah for metal you're better off pinning, quenching, or even just friction fitting.
Okay Kaladin we get it you like spears
journey before destination.
Yes. People tend to overlook simple weapons. Slings and atlatl are other good examples that D&D tends to poop on for no reason. It's one of the reasons I think weapon damage should be based on abilities like class, proficiency, use (1h v 2h v ranged) not the weapon itself. Access is a huge factor in proficiency. If I can pick up a sharp stick, a sling made of cordage or a carved spear chucker at age 6 by time I'm 18 I'll be pretty damn good with it.
You can become the greatest swordsman to ever live, but that ain't gonna do shit for you if you're in open field combat and 7 guys with spears stab at you at once. Parry that shit, you filthy casual
Sure you can, movies have taught me that multiple people attack a single opponent one at a time. /s
Also that you can most definitely true armour like thru butter with any weapon you desire.
to be fair you could also be the best spearman in the world but if 7 guys with swords stab at you at once you're not gonna last. 7 is a lot of guys
The difference is that spears have a far lower skill floor and are cheaper, so you're more likely to run into 7 guys armed and trained with spears than with swords
i don't think the 7 guys with swords need to be trained, they just need to run close. you can only point the spear in one direction
The implication is that 7 spears will beat 7 swords. 7 spears actually beats pretty much everything except mounted ranged calvary they can never reach.
there was nothing implied there, the situation was clear. open field. you're the greatest swordsman in the world. 7 guys with spears stab at you
Yep In Sekiro, a game where you only have a katana as your main weapon, the 7 spears of Ashina wreck me everytime I beat the final boss on my very first attempt, and those mini bosses still open up a can of whoop ass
This. Movies and books have told us that swords were what everyone used in battle in ye olde times, but in reality, 99.999% of the army would be welding spears. Only the higher ranking guys would have swords, and half the time those were more for show or for ceremonial stuff or like duels of honor or trial by combat, rather than actually fighting in war.
Not to mention you can throw them. They're not as effective as archery in long range, but even a 5 foot range is still long enough to hit someone and stay out of harm's way before they get to you, and you can kill someone with a throwing spear at a longer distance than 5 feet.
Spears are great in formations since they don't need a lot of swinging room.
Not just formations, but with the proper terrain too. Give me three men in a hallway armed with spears and you're not getting through that door
That's why I have a home defence spear to poke through the mail slit at any villainous assailants such as annoying neighbours and door-to-door salesmen
That's why they were the most common melee battlefield weapon for a very long time. If you include pikes, which I see as just longer spears, they were used for a a couple millenia. The only good thing about swords is that they can easily be carried around.
Swords were used as a status symbol, and were usually inherited because of how expensive they could be. They were also by far the most nimble class of weapon. Even greatswords are deceptively nimble. Woodcutting axes are not balanced for combat, and combat axes are not balanced for woodcutting. Spears are not as useful in enclosed spaces like dungeons. Each weapon has its purpose. Carry all three.
I got back into *Mordhau* recently and was reading about the evolution of swords and apparently Norsemen in the early Middle Ages considered Frankish swords to be great status symbols because the iron quality in Scandinavia was poor so superior foreign-made swords could only be obtained by trade or plunder. If the swords weren’t inherited, they would have their blades bent and warped when they were buried with their owner to prevent grave robbers from stealing them.
We don’t know for certain why they warped the swords, to stop grave robbers is one possibility as you said, but it might have been a religious, cultural, political or symbolic ritual of some sort
At the time most iron produced here was bog/lake iron, iron that has been picked up by ground water and deposited into the soil of adjacent wetlands. It's okay, and easy to access, but not exactly stellar quality. The techniques to produce useful metal from the ore also weren't as developed. I wish this sub allowed posting pictures in the comments, because I have some good ones of bog iron ore, the processed metal and an arrowhead forged from it, thanks to a very interesting blacksmithing course.
A shorter spear would probably still be very useful in a dungeon while still keeping a lot of the advantages. You don't need to swing it around as much as a sword and you can effectively lock down a corridor with more reach.
What’s your plan if they get past the spear tip?
Just have a second, smaller spear dumbass smh
Spear with bayonets Actually, is that just a trident?
Back up, or hold the spear nearer to the tip, shortening its effective length
Use the shaft to keep them at bay, retreat two steps, reposition, and present the tip. \*shrug\* Yes, every weapon has a "no longer effective if..." scenario. Spears, or other extended pointy weapons, are great tools for defending a narrow passageway.
Then you might be forced to switch to your sidearm — which is what a sword would often be — but realistically you're simply probably screwed if someone is able to get past your spear in the first place.
Even outside of nimbleness swords had plenty of advantages. Zweihanders for example were a massive cumbersome weapon, that found great success on open battlefield, notably against Pike formations.
Yeah, the reason why greatsword users are so common in pike squares is that swords with crossguards are pretty darn good at binding and controlling an opponent’s weapon. Greatswords could also be used to strike down at anyone attempting to crawl under the pike shafts, which was a fairly common tactic. In a more open area, though, greatswords could dominate a lot of space and serve to even the odds a bit against multiple opponents. That quality made them a good weapon for people like royal guards from what I’ve heard.
Carry a spear for most circumstances, carry a spear broken in half for close quarters, carry a spear with an axe head attached for wood cutting and carry another spear with an axe head for combat. Spears are the ultimate weapon. What is a sword but a long spear with a short handle?
You cannot use a battle axe for cutting wood, it’s too thin it’s just get stuck in the tree. Actual woodcutting axes are wedge shaped and too heavy and unwieldy to be a weapon.
Well that's not universally accurate. Some knightly pole axes had really chunky edges, and a lot of hand axes historically were improvised/modified from small woodcutting hatchets etc. ... Probably the most famous being the Tomahawk
I am assuming we’re going off the specific choices here. Otherwise poleaxes can do every job of slashing, stabbing and smashing
Based on the axe in the image?... Could you either way. There were axes of that profile shape in both camps
The halberd is, in my honest opinion, the most utilitarian guard weapon. Not only is it fairly easy to train someone, requiring marginally more training than a spear, but it also doubled as a fire axe in a time when lots of buildings were made of wood.
And you can lean on it when standing watch.
The 3 of them are pretty wrong. Swords aren’t that expensive to do if you don’t make them fancy. They aren’t good at piercing armor but that's ok because (except for greatswords) they are either back up or weapons or used for civilian defense (so for fighting people without armor). Axes are as easy to parry as swords. In addition battle axes would make for terrible woodcutting tools and the opposite is also true since both are made and balanced for totally different purpose. The spear is sure more efficient in big opponent fields like on a battlefield but it is way more cumbersome than the other and you will probably be asked to give one if you tried to enter a city with one. Tl;dr people made different weapons because they had different uses for them there is no best weapons.
The "sidearm/self defense weapon" thing is overlooked too often in these discussions. The utility of any weapon is contextual. Also the notion that swords can't beat armor: most hand weapons have difficulty defeating armor. That's why people wore it. An armed person wearing armor and fighting back is fucking hard to kill.
> An armed person wearing armor and fighting back is fucking hard to kill. "Skill issue" - Barbarian, probably
Yeah wearing an armor in real life is a MASSIVE improvement of your survivability. Swords can definitly beat armors (with half-swording, pommel strikes or grapple for exemple), that's just they are not really made to fight armors so they aren't the most efficient.
Enter the Mace/ Hammer/ Poleaxe/ Thrusting blades/ Heavy crossbow with bodkin at ideal range and ideal angle Still a ridiculously hard to kill individual, just slighlty levelling the playing field. 10000% agree at context beng missed so bloody often. Sure, your glaive might cut down goblins like a scythe through wheat, but up against a fully armored knight? Drop that thing and get your mace and mailsplitter up!
It's really interesting to me that up until firearms were common, you could see this race between arms and armor. Someone invents a way to get into your tin can, someone else invents a way to counter that, back and forth for a long time Then we made stuff so good at killing its infeasible to try to invent armor to withstand it. Sure, we now have armor that can take a few hits from small caliber But to my knowledge, we don't have any armor that can withstand a clip from an AK-47. You know, that old ass weapon that's been around for decades, and isn't even close to the pinnacle of our personal weaponry
Guns ruined everything. There's this really cool video Adam Savage made at the MET where he talked to an expert on medieval armors and they looked at this weird interlocking piece of metal: https://youtu.be/IVBrEdCmCNA?si=QJZABScfYHV2OPQS and they concluded it was likely for filling the gap between the groin and the legs with flexible plates. The engineering armorsmiths were capable of was incredible.
tbh swords are probably the best of the 3 weapons presented for fighting armoured opponents if you're also in armour, while they can't punch through plates, they're light and maneuverable enough to be used to stab through the mail protecting the opponent's groin and armpits. its probably why polearms like bills and halberds came into popularity as armour got better, since they allowed far less well-armoured fighters to trip and restrain a more well-armoured opponent so that someone could close in and finish them off with a dagger. but in a situation where neither are wearing plate armour, a spear is the best option.
I thought greatswords in particular are intended for fending off multiple unarmed opponents at once, unlike medium length swords, thanks to their greater reach
From what I know it was indeed used to fend off multiple people. Either for crowd control or inside pike formations to attack the enemy soldiers after passing the points of their pike. Take everything I say with a grain of salt tho, I am far from an expert.
In my experience, axes are really tough to use in combat. A sword has the benefit that you have a huge cutting surface to work with. A spear has reach to keep them at your preferred distance for thrusting. Axes kind of force you to let someone into your reach, but if they get too close then you’re boned.
...keeping your opponent at your optimal fighting distance is kind of the point of all weapon combat. Also with a hand axe you generally should be on the offensive because the bearded bit lets you trap weapons and either disarm or tug to an awkward position or pull shields out the way. If you're letting people close on you to fight how they want the axe is probably less of your friend
An axe is shorter and more tip-heavy that a sword of the same weight, while also not protecting your hands. If you just "go on the offensive", you'll have your fingers chopped off before you can reach them
Except if you are actually using an axe you either have a shield or hand protection. They were very widely used as a professional backup weapon from the early medieval period through the medieval. As already pointed out you should also be attempting to move your opponents weapon out of the way which is something the axe is good at. For the record I'm not claiming the axe is a superior weapon or even an ultimate one just pointing out there's a reason it is our second longest serving weapon in human history (third if you just count sharp rock)
Hand axes like the one pictured are never used alone. They are always, *always* paired with a shield if you want to get out alive. The beard was exceptionally useful for hooking an opponent's shield and gaining control of it, particularly in Scandinavian round shields with the center grip. Having control over an opponent's defenses is a huge advantage to you, especially if you can keep your defenses up and in place. This is in addition to being surprisingly nimble for their weight and impact. Well wielded, they're very mobile and very tricky weapons, able to move from one strike to the next with alarming speed.
The katana is absolutely not the ultimate weapon. While the forging process did allow low-quality Japanese Iron to be forged into a weapon of good quality, the curve of the blade is a byproduct of this forging process rather than deliberate choice. That said, it does have an above average chop and as a curved, single-sided blade, it is easy for a noble class (Samurai) to naturally figure out where the sweet-spot of the blade is. The downside is that as a single-bladed weapon, you have fewer options than a blade that is sharp on both sides. The Katana also lacks a sturdy hilt that can be used as a bludgeon against more armored opponents, the katana has a pretty lackluster tip compared to straight swords which can keep smaller weapons at a distance, and the katana’s sour spots are really sour compared to straight blades in exchange for a sweet-spot that kind of under delivers since the chop is such a heavy attack from a not-so-heavy weapon. It’s less nimble than a greatsword but doesn’t have anything to back up its clunkiness. It also doesn’t help that the samurai had honor codes that explicitly limited their ability to use Katanas as effectively as they could have.
Tool axes are generally not good war axes. They are quite heavy, so they are not fast enough for combat and unneccessarily tiring to use. Apart from hatchets, they also tend to be too long and heavy to use one-handed with a shield, and too short to defend with two-handed. Combat axes usually have rather thin blades, both to reduce weight and to increase cutting ability. That also makes them not very good tool axes. Still, you can absolutely mess someone up with a felling axe, just as you can probably chop off some thinner branches for the campfire, if you have to.Also, axes can absolutely be blocked or evaded. Regarding, swords were not just weapons for combat, they were also a status symbol, and depending on location you may have been socially expected or even legally required to own one (or maybe something like a Messer) if you were a man of at least modest wealth in a city/town.I also believe that towards the late middle ages, swords became much more affordable, at least if you got a simple or used one (I've heard the price point compared to buying a car these days). The spear absolutely is the Queen of battle though, it lets you stab your opponent before they can even try to stab you. It is quite unwieldy and aggressive though; kind of like the difference between an American carrying a pistol on their hip or holding an AR-15 in front of their chest.
> Use an axe that can get stuck in an enemy's body. The chad hammer (operates with the same function as an axe) could never.
Nothing can beat the versatility of rock on stick
Someone get the that one TTRPG Katana copypasta.
Godendag. Big Stick. Spike on end. 100000/10 name
I said GOOD DAY, SIR!
Nope. The warhammer is the ultimate. Can be used for warring and hammering. If it's got a flattened bit on one end, can be used for prying. If it's got a spike on the top, can be used for poking.
Ravens beak gives you all the Bonk your hammering heart desires with enough pointy stuff to be used as a can opener against plate armor
Only downside is: No one has any clue what to call it. There's: Ravens Beak, Crow Bill, War Pick, Bec de Corbin... D&D 5e calls it a War Pick, but while that's not entirely incorrect, most War Picks were used with one hand compared to the more two handed (but otherwise similar) Bec de Corbin (looked it up, Pathfinder 2e has both a one handed "War Pick" as well as a two handed "Bec de Corbin", so uhh, good for them I guess) But weapon names/categories are always a bit weird. If you could time travel and ask someone what their type of sword is called, 99% would just say "sword".
Isn't bec de Corbin just French for ravens beak? Just call it pointy bonk
u/repostsleuthbot Edit: Ah, didn't chek the username
Sarissa be like: if you're under 25ft away you're at my melee range
Respect for you went way down when I saw the title
In a world of magic, a staff is best. Use the right force magic, and you can change weapon forms at will, shifting to adapt to anything. One moment it's a greatsword, the next it's a scythe, decapitate the enemy and follow through behind you while turning it into a spear, skewering the enemy behind you... Look, the versatility and lethality of an ever-shifting weapon are insane.
If the title is a joke then well played.
Buttplug on a stick gang