Re: (TFT) Is a sweeping blow physically cutting thru your target?

["Charles Gadda" <cgadda@earthlink.net>]

> Duh. I had the chance recently to attend a gathering of smiths at Albion
> Armourers, where we conversed on just this sort of thing. Peter Johnsson
(a
> smith from Sweden) put it best when he said that the smiths of that time,
> even early, had hundreds of years of forging tradition behind them. Add to
> that that the sword was the instrument by which not only wars were won,
but
> the personal safety of the most important people, and it's pretty crazy to
> assume that any aspect of the sword was not done deliberately, and to the
> highest possible quality.
>
> And handling a thousand year old piece from the Oakeshott collection was
> pretty cool, too...

Ah! When was this gathering? I heard nothing of it, alas. Were any minutes
or proceedings published? Peter Johnsson is an amazing smith - I've drooled
myself into idiocy looking over his work. I'd really like to commission him
to make me a replica of the Svante Nilsson Sture's sword that he did a
couple years back, but even my well paying engineering job doesn't quite
give me the budget for that...

>
> I'm not so sure that I'd recommend either Hrisoulas or Davidsson for
> discussions of period technique. While Hrisoulas is obviously a fine
smith,
> his books do tend to concentrate on the modern. And while I very much like
> "Sword in Anglo Saxon England", it's more about the cultural impact of the
> sword, with the pattern welding stuff just a snippet way in the back.
> There's a pertty good book in German on the migration-era stuff, but I
don't
> have it here at work.

Yeah, not the best references, but I wanted to stick with stuff that was
more accesible. Behmer's "Das Zweischneidige Schwert der Germanischen
Volkerwanderungszeit" is a bit more scarce, to say nothing of the fact that
it is written in rather obtusely phrased German (I'm in the middle of
translating the &^%#$ thing now)

> On the other hand, it always amuses me to hear both discussion on how
> European pattern-welding and Japanese tamagahane were done to increase the
> strength of the blade. Well, they were, but only indirectly. The problem
was
> that both sides had rather poor, heterongenous materials. Bog iron isn't
the
> best stuff, nor is iron-bearing sand. By pattern-welding, and doing tatara
> smelts followed by folding, the purpose was to create as homogenous a
> material as possible. You can bet money that if one of those old smiths
had
> access to even today's plain carbon steels, he'd jump at the chance to use
> it. The techniques used were attempts to make the best blade possible out
of
> relatively poor materials.

Damn straight. Though pattern welding, etc. is not a bad technique for
having a flexible and shock resistant core with an attached cutting edge
that can maintain its sharpness.

> But the weapon is only half of the equation. Look at Flos Duellatorum of
> Fiore De Liberi, wherein Fiore says that swords are useless for cutting
> against armor. It's true that armor at that time was plate, but again
> there's hundreds of years of tradition there. It seems to me that (looking
> over the manuals I've seen), that there just weren't techniques out there
> designed to cleave all the way through the human body. It's a waste of
> energy to do more than kill.

Yep. TFT is far too generous with the power of its swords vs. armour. This
is where a penetration stat, like the one Ty Beard suggested and is in fact
used in TFT under Giant Spiders and Scorpions, would come in handy.

Actually, a sword can cut though mail, even riveted mail, but *only* with a
very hard and square hit, which you usually do not get in most fights.
Against a bobbing and weaving target, that is unlikely to occur (except when
said target "zigs" instead of "zags" - then, OUCH!) Otherwise, riveted &
welded mail provides pretty good protection, and can absorb an amazing
degree of abuse (though blunt trauma is still a concern). Making some of the
stuff right now and can I just say it gives the term "labour intensive"
whole new meaning! Plate is pretty much proof against swords, though I have
seem some meagre evidence to the contrary (thinking mostly here of mediaeval
artist depictions of great helms being split by swords. Not reliable
evidence but it cannot be wholly discounted, either). Either you aim for a
part not protected by plate (armpits, groin, vision slot, etc.) or discard
sword in favour of a nice, massy warhammer with a wicked back spike... or
any decent sized pole arm or heavy crossbow.

> Then again, it >is< a fantasy game.
>
> Neil Gilmore
> raito@raito.com
> =====
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> "unsubscribe tft"
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"