+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: The Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Flood (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+--- Thread: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... (/showthread.php?tid=123116)
RE: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... - Vogel - 11-25-2014
If you think that's bad, try watching fantasy games use sabers incorrectly. It's amazing how much thought and skill goes into both the design and use of sabers, and yet to most folks it's just another blade that shows up in the civil war or something.
RE: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... - Syrus - 11-25-2014
(11-24-2014, 05:58 AM)nOmnomnOm Wrote:So that explains why I dislike most of the Skyrim weapon designs and why the Dragonbone GS is my favorite...I seem to have a sense for nonsense in such regards...Im sorry skyrim lovers.
Wish they had stuck with more realistic weapons, at least for all the non-deadric stuff.
RE: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... - Derkylos - 11-25-2014
(11-24-2014, 07:19 PM)Zed26 Wrote: Oh yeah, I could never get over how Daedric weapons with their Oblivion-infused ebony and enchantments really broke the realism in Skyrim.
That's why I stick to shooting beams of lightning out of my hands and summoning guardians made of ice to tank their fire breath when I'm fighting dragons so I can craft more realistic weapons from their bones and absorb their souls to enhance my ability to shout people to death and prepare for a final battle in Nord heaven against an immortal dragon who's also the aspect of a god.
Remind me to invite this guy to my next tabletop gaming session. Sounds like he'd be the life of the party.
Point is that, in most fantasy settings, physics is unchanged, and magic is essentially an overlay. Unless it isn't and you're just throwing the laws of physics out of the window. And those laws are the predominant factors in weapons design, even if the designers are just making things that work well and don't know what said laws are.
So your sword made from the bones of a dragon or "speshul skai metal" or sharpened with magic or posessed by a demon is still swung by a 100 kg man standing in 9 m/s^2 gravity, and if you define the tensile strength of the scales of your dragon-god, you can even determine exactly how fast/how forcefully you must swing your demon-possessed sky-metal sword to cut through.
And having a spike that would obviously poke you in the eye when you swing it may look cool, but it's still impractical...
(11-25-2014, 03:55 AM)Vogel Wrote: If you think that's bad, try watching fantasy games use sabers incorrectly. It's amazing how much thought and skill goes into both the design and use of sabers, and yet to most folks it's just another blade that shows up in the civil war or something.
The same could be said for pretty much any sword. Or weapon. Polearms are my pet peeve. Anyone who knows the basics of how to use a spear can tell you that your opponent cannot be "too close" for you to use it effectively, and that you cannot "attack through" your friend who is standing between you and the enemy without severe repercussions.
Also, sabres existed long before the 19th century...
RE: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... - Thyrzul - 11-25-2014
(11-24-2014, 05:07 PM)Derkylos Wrote: Also, swords were among the least used weapons of the medieval period.
Depends what part of Earth you look at. I guess native Americans of that time had different favorites than swords, but I'm sure that the exact opposite of what you said applies to Europe, Asia or North-Africa.
RE: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... - nOmnomnOm - 11-25-2014
Clubs and maces and spears are more easy to learn to use than a sword anyway . You need more technique with it.
RE: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... - Thyrzul - 11-25-2014
I don't really know as I am yet to learn fighting with clubs, maces or spears, but I wouldn't be surprised if it would turn out Fiore dei Liberi or some other medieval folk managed to write a few pages of techniques with them. Though spears are similar to staff and I've seen techniques with staff/stick/baton (not the french kind of bâton) before. Also for some reason I feel that with less techniques to learn and use the aforementioned weapons are also less effective than swords are, but maybe that's just me being too much used to swordplay.
RE: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... - Derkylos - 11-25-2014
(11-25-2014, 06:54 AM)Thyrzul Wrote:Depends what part of Earth you look at. I guess native Americans of that time had different favorites than swords, but I'm sure that the exact opposite of what you said applies to Europe, Asia or North-Africa.
Swords were far more common as a secondary weapon, save for the larger, two-handed variants which tended to appear in more specialised roles.
For almost all of history before the 20th century, the spear or a variant thereof (bayonets are essentially guns re-purposed into spears) dominated the battlefield, due to it's relative ease of handling, the simplicity of manufacture, as well as the ease with which the raw materials could be obtained (a spear uses far less metal than a sword/mace) and the effectiveness of a solid formation.
From what records we have (most probably highly biased, anyways), Native Americans (or rather, Incans) appear to be among the few cultures to employ one-handed swords as a primary weapon.
Almost no one in a European army would use a sword as their primary weapon, focusing instead on polearms and missile weapons for foot troops and some version of a lance for mounted combat (although, admittedly, a good portion of horsemen would probably get a fair amount of use from their backups).
From what I understand, Asia (primarily China and Japan and the related cultures) followed a similar pattern, with the eastern nomadic tribes favouring the bow.
My knowledge of African weaponry and in fact anything related to their military is fairly limited, due in no small part, I imagine, from the paucity of sources, but it's easy to imagine that, given the spear's obvious supremacy, they probably followed a similar approach to equipping their armies.
On the other hand, many members of medieval society would own a sword, given it's effectiveness as a personal defensive weapon, it's relatively small size in comparison with the typical weapons of war and, of course, the attribute that makes it so favoured by fantasy warriors...it's function as a status symbol.
You can wield a sword in one hand, leaving your other hand free to steady your horse, gesture to your followers, grasp trophies, hold your signifier of leadership, etc. You can also point with a sword, to urge your men forward, or make yourself more visible on a crowded battlefield.
Swords were often intricately decorated and painstakingly crafted for people of importance such as warlords, kings, generals, etc. Of course, said people would rarely, if ever, use the things...
And, of course, the main character of a fantasy setting is someone of great importance...and, as such, requires a weapon to demonstrate their status...and the thing that immediately comes to mind is a sword...
(11-25-2014, 09:30 AM)Thyrzul Wrote:Though spears are similar to staff and I've seen techniques with staff/stick/baton (not the french kind of bâton) before. Also for some reason I feel that with less techniques to learn and use the aforementioned weapons are also less effective than swords are, but maybe that's just me being too much used to swordplay.
Spears are not used like staves, primarily because spears have one primary striking surface. A skilled spear user can defeat a swordsman in a duel, primarily because it's so damn hard to get close enough to land a blow when you have a pointy thing in your face all the time, but a spear really shines when employed en-masse on a battlefield...something which is rarely seen in the modern world thanks to the introduction of light, automatic firearms.
RE: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... - Thyrzul - 11-25-2014
Spears worked as long as you could keep your opponent far enough, get closer and you are screwed against a sword (especially if it cuts the pole of your spear in half). As the blade is fully made of metal, it could serve as both an offensive and a defensive tool (master cuts in the early-Liechtenauerian tradition are pretty much for that, block and hit with the exact same move). Same goes for knives, get close enough that even swords are useless and they come into play during wrestling. Because of this you can't clearly define which was the primary or secondary because they worked for different ranges. On top of that, as there existed polearms of different sizes (pike, spear, etc), there were also swords of different sizes (one-handed sword, one-and-half-handed/bastard sword or longsword, montante, two-handed sword, etc.).
Though I can mostly speak for European martial arts, I can say that out of many kinds of melee weapons, swords were used the most widely. In battles, in duels, 'blossfechten' or in full armor. Status symbol? Nah, rather if somebody had a horse or a shiny armor, or maybe both, I'd say a full set would be a status symbol, but swords only? Or just to point at things while looking cool on a white horse? Naaah. They were weapons. They are weapons.
EDIT: Having a pointy thing in your face all the time can also be achieved against a sword (have experienced that a few weeks ago in a duel), but then whether it's a spear or a sword, it can be hit away, at which point all it matters is how quick you can swing your weapon. And at that, the sword beats the spear.
Also you can't do much else than stab with spear, while with sword you can also slice.
Though I can mostly speak for European martial arts, I can say that out of many kinds of melee weapons, swords were used the most widely. In battles, in duels, 'blossfechten' or in full armor. Status symbol? Nah, rather if somebody had a horse or a shiny armor, or maybe both, I'd say a full set would be a status symbol, but swords only? Or just to point at things while looking cool on a white horse? Naaah. They were weapons. They are weapons.
EDIT: Having a pointy thing in your face all the time can also be achieved against a sword (have experienced that a few weeks ago in a duel), but then whether it's a spear or a sword, it can be hit away, at which point all it matters is how quick you can swing your weapon. And at that, the sword beats the spear.
Also you can't do much else than stab with spear, while with sword you can also slice.
RE: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... - Mímir - 11-25-2014
you all generalize way too much, and the dude that made those videos is probably the biggest fool around, "debunking" high fantasy as if anyone ever believed in it...
the only somewhat useful bit is in the youtube comments on the skyrim video, where a game developer posted the reasons why melee weapons look the way they look in computer games.
RE: I'm Sorry Fantasy Lovers... - Thyrzul - 11-25-2014
(11-25-2014, 10:30 AM)Mímir Wrote: the only somewhat useful bit is in the youtube comments on the skyrim video, where a game developer posted the reasons why melee weapons look the way they look in computer games.
"It may not be realistic, but we're talking about a game where you fight dragons and kill people by yelling at them."
You mean this one?