I'm designing a game system and had a discussion with a buddy about weapon groups, and whether training in one weapon like a short sword can translate into skills with a long sword, thereby making sense for the weapons to be grouped together in a logical fashion. What is everyone's opinion here?

thanks!

The long sword is a very versatile weapon and can be used in ways a short sword simply cannot by design. A longsword can be used at the halfsword and is a very affective lever for instance in armoured combat. They are different weapons and will have different strengths and weaknesses given their nature and length. They will want to be used differently, if that maks any sense? I do think certain basic mechanics would transfer from one on to the other however i.e. knowing how to work with distance, timing, strikes.

I'm assuming you mean an arming sword/ single hander?

I hope you get something from this...running on two hours sleep....twenty something hours later...

Actually, the really beautiful thing about martial arts is that the techniques of single hand sword can be almost exactly the same as a longsword, depending on the system. German messer techniques are almost the exact same techniques as German longsword, right down to the halfswording. There is an extra master strike with Lekuchner's messer, but most of the core strikes are otherwise more or less the same, and most of the tactical use is also executed in the same manner. Messer technique is directly translatable to just about any single hander.

The SHORT short sword of most fantacy games, (D&D shortsword, Gladius, Ciquenda, viking Sax, katzbalger) has more in common with daggers than swords; they are primarily thrusting weapons, and use those techniques. You CAN hew with them, but the longer weapons are so much better at it that that the dagger style is a lot more favorable.


One handed swords (Broadswords, D&D longswords) and Real Life Longswords use much of the same technique.

However, the one handed sword is most commonly used with a shield or buckler, something the longswordman will not be very good at before he learns to use.

I'd make a group for short stabbing weapons, and one for long bladed weapons

As far as a role playing system goes, I would group short sword and longsword in the same broad category. There are certainly technical differences, but when it comes down to it, the skill sets are more or less the same. It's not like comparing longsword and knife fighting (which have a lot more in common than people give them credit for, but are still distinctly different).

When it comes down to it, if you are proficient with any hand to hand weapon, you will most likely have an idea of how to use most other hand to hand weapons, with the exception of a few outlyers. (e.g. a bullwhip and a sword are very different) So for a game it all depends on how nitpicky you want to be about the rules.

I didn't even notice it was for a games system. :\

I feel stupid

Hi Bill!

Bill Grandy wrote:

Actually, the really beautiful thing about martial arts is that the techniques of single hand sword can be almost exactly the same as a longsword, depending on the system. German messer techniques are almost the exact same techniques as German longsword, right down to the halfswording. There is an extra master strike with Lekuchner's messer, but most of the core strikes are otherwise more or less the same, and most of the tactical use is also executed in the same manner. Messer technique is directly translatable to just about any single hander.

Well...yes and no. There are some fundamental differences that are important to recognize when moving back and forth between these two 'sub-systems'. The one-handed nature of the messer affects timing and leverage in the fight. For instance, the high guard is usually different in what leg leads: vom Tag with the longsword has the left leg leading with the right side version of the guard, while Luginslant with the messer leads with the sword arm side leg. This is because the messer can't provide cover for the body anyway and the hand has to extend more to strike, so the threat is presented earlier.

Some longsword techniques don't work well with the messer, and vice-versa. The messer equivalents of the Schielhau and Scheitelhau are much downplayed by Leckuchner, simply because without the leverage provided by the left hand, they are only so-so blows. This is also why there's a sixth stroke, which moves in a way that the two-handed weapon cannot do well. The messer, for its part, is capable of a greater variety of disarms and grapples by virtue of its shorter length and one-handed play. These differences likely account for why Leckuchner spun his own variant verses for this weapon - there are important concerns to be reckoned with.

Those cautions aside, there's much for a longswordsman to learn from the messer, and vice-versa. The tactical and fighting philosophy framework is consistent.

All the best,

Christian

Hi Christian,
Thanks for the info. I can't wait for the translation of Lekuchner to come out, so I can start actually seriously study the material! Talhoffer, Codex Wallerstein and Kal just aren't good enough, unfortunately. :)

Thanks so much for the insight. I guess I have to tread a fine line. Maybe the similarities will translate to the equivalent of a level 1 skill in "similar" weapons - but that's it. To advance beyond level one skill, you must actually train in the individual weapons?

Would this logic translate well to say other weapons like a katana or mace?

Thanks immensely!!

speaking of weapons, I am trying to devise disadvantages to using a halberd. I'm aware that they are so good that they were used as primary weapon in the battlefield whenever possible.

So what about the disadvantages? I want all my weapons to have mechanics such that you will want to use each and every one of them for their own reasons. I don't want one weapon to have no advantages such that no player ends up using it, and no one weapon so good that it is better than every other weapon.

In the previous version of my game (I am completely revising the entire system), I had halberds simply operate slower. I feel this is not entirely correct, as halberds could be quite fast as well.

What do you guys think of this:

1) Halberds need a lot of room to operate correctly, if there are too many people in the immediate vacinity, the defence capability is reduced
2) Halberds don't work well against more than one opponent. Because of the long nature of the weapon, one enemy could easily grab the long shaft whilst the user was attacking another.
3) any others you can think of?

thanks!!!!!!!!!!!

Compared to spears, helbards are not as good at stabbing; the broader heads means that they need larger openings.
They are also generally a bit shorter.

As far as I remember, spears where recomended for attack, while helbariders where better at defence.
This because a spear can "slide" into a enemy formation more efficiently.

Their disadvantage is the absence of a shield, and the weakness against rushing that they share with all polearms.