Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Real weapons vs. D&D weapons Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page Previous  1, 2 
Author Message
Otto Karl




Location: Ulm, Germany
Joined: 05 Dec 2007

Posts: 15

PostPosted: Mon 25 Feb, 2008 1:21 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Chad Arnow wrote:
The combined gun/knife is not pure fantasy:
Please check out our Spotlight Article on Combination Weapons for more info.


Hey Chad:
Did those weapons really work? I know some of them look realy mean, but when talking about tools is much better a drill to make holes, a hammer to strike and a carton knife to cut than a single electric motor that dives a drill, a cutting blade and a compressed air hammer, because a design for a single use is far more reliable.
View user's profile Send private message ICQ Number
Otto Karl




Location: Ulm, Germany
Joined: 05 Dec 2007

Posts: 15

PostPosted: Mon 25 Feb, 2008 1:29 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:
According to Garcilaso de la Vega, the Amerindians in Florida had all types of weapons known to Spanish save the crossbow and gun. This includes pikes (picas), spears (lancas), partisans (partefanas), and two-handed swords (montante). However, they preferred bows and arrows.


When they say two-handed swords (montante) they actually mean the big stick I was talking about. Amerindians actualy did not know how to work on metals, so they were not able to make a big mean and rough swiss/german sword like those of the Landsknechten, which is more like a montante.
View user's profile Send private message ICQ Number
Otto Karl




Location: Ulm, Germany
Joined: 05 Dec 2007

Posts: 15

PostPosted: Mon 25 Feb, 2008 1:38 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Anders Backlund wrote:
Actually, obsidian is a type of volcanic glass. Hence it's very hard, but not at all strong. It is true obsidian blades are sharper then steel but they were also extremely fragile. In fact, I belive the Aztec warrior would have carried extra blades to replace those that would be broken in battle.


Because of that it was not easy for them to hurt a Spaniard on armor, even more because the conquistadores had big mean muskets. But I think is rather improbable to take a break on a battle to change some obsidian blades from your weapon, because there is always a man ready to crack your head with his own weapon.
View user's profile Send private message ICQ Number
Benjamin H. Abbott




Location: New Mexico
Joined: 28 Feb 2004

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,248

PostPosted: Mon 25 Feb, 2008 1:47 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
When they say two-handed swords (montante) they actually mean the big stick I was talking about. Amerindians actualy did not know how to work on metals, so they were not able to make a big mean and rough swiss/german sword like those of the Landsknechten, which is more like a montante.


Yes, I know that. The point is that apparently had a great variety of weapons, though the bow and arrow dominated. Because of their lack of armor, it's easy to see why they chose the bow. A pike or partisan won't save you from an arrow, regardless of whether it has a steel head.
View user's profile Send private message
Anders Backlund




Location: Sweden
Joined: 24 Oct 2007

Posts: 629

PostPosted: Mon 25 Feb, 2008 1:55 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Otto Karl wrote:

Hey Chad:
Did those weapons really work? I know some of them look realy mean, but when talking about tools is much better a drill to make holes, a hammer to strike and a carton knife to cut than a single electric motor that dives a drill, a cutting blade and a compressed air hammer, because a design for a single use is far more reliable.


From what I've heard, combination weapons were relatively rare oddities that were often never put to much use. But that's no reason to think they wouldn't work. It's really the same principle as the bayonette, only somewhat downsized.

Otto Karl wrote:

Because of that it was not easy for them to hurt a Spaniard on armor, even more because the conquistadores had big mean muskets. But I think is rather improbable to take a break on a battle to change some obsidian blades from your weapon, because there is always a man ready to crack your head with his own weapon.


Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I naturally meant that they would replace the damaged blades after the battle.

The sword is an ode to the strife of mankind.

"This doesn't look easy... but I bet it is!"
-Homer Simpson.
View user's profile Send private message
Thomas Watt




Location: Metrowest Boston
Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 159

PostPosted: Mon 25 Feb, 2008 2:18 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The ancient Hawai'ians used ironwood as both a club and to make a blade (I know it sounds strange... until you actually encounter ironwood!).
I hoped I would find an image online via the Bishop Museum, but I cannot locate one.
But that's always an avenue.

Have 11 swords, 2 dirks, half a dozen tomahawks and 2 Jeeps - seem to be a magnet for more of all.
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Real weapons vs. D&D weapons
Page 2 of 2 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2 All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum