Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.77373497 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Since the average untrained spearman can easily beat even a very skilled swordsman, I've always found it ridiculous that many games give the spear stats that are close to or even below that of the sword's.

Can anyone recommend systems that portray these weapons a bit more realistically?

>> No.77373545

>>77373497
Just having low health and reaction attacks to enemies in range would portray them well. In a lot of turn based games you can just casually walk behind someone holding a spear.

>> No.77373561

>>77373497
>Since the average untrained spearman can easily beat even a very skilled swordsman,

prove it

>> No.77373577

>>77373497
>untrained spearman can easily beat even a very skilled swordsman
Wouldn't a trained swordsman know the weaknesses of his weapon and fight around it? Do you think he's just going to stand there and let himself get stabbed?

>> No.77373601

>>77373561
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afqhBODc_8U
its a pretty commonly accepted fact when you consider that the swordsman has to close through the spears strike zone before he can even attempt to land a hit
>>77373577
its more about reaction speed being faster for the spear, the reach the spear has and how easy they are to use. swords have historically been a secondary weapon to various forms of spears and pikes throughout history exactly for these reasons. of course as with any combat involving two random people you cant actually predict the results 100% of the time, but in this case the vast majority of peasants with a spear could defeat a skilled swordsman who just had a sword - things like armour, shields and other things can change the outcome

>> No.77373658

>>77373497
I noticed the same issue and feel like most systems, in general have odd rules and even stats that make no sense to me in regards to the nuances of melee combat.

>> No.77373736

>>77373601
This is why people hate HEMAfags. You take one example and presume it is a goddamn rule through and through.

>> No.77373883

>>77373736
But if anon had posted a ton of evidence you'd complain it was too much to read, watch, etc. You'd rather just claim you're correct regardless of facts because you value your opinions over the facts presented by others.

>> No.77373884

>>77373736
For the most part, the sword was a side-arm. They became iconic because they were what the warrior class had swinging around their hip as they went around their day-to-day. Like a handgun.

But the spear is a primary arm. A rifle. When knights and samurai went off to war, they fought with spears and lances. Cuz they're better.

>> No.77373887

>>77373884
Facts

>> No.77374137

>>77373884
good analogy. you don't think of cowboys for their rifles (unless you understand firearms), but for their handguns, always hanging on the hip

>> No.77374185

That's it. I'm sick of all this "swords are better than spears" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Spears deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine pointy stick in downtown L.A. for 3 popsicles (that's about $2.00) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my pointy stick.

Your average idiot spends a few minutes working on a single pointy stick and grind it against a abrasive surface a million times to produce the finest stick known to mankind.

Spears are thrice as sharp as swords and thrice as long for that matter too. Anything a sword can cut through, a spear can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a spear could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical thrust.

Ever wonder why medieval england never bothered conquering france? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined spearmen and their spears of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the spear first because their killing power was feared and respected.

So what am I saying? spears are simply the best weapon that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for spear:

(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 piercing power of spears in real life, don't you think?

tl;dr = spears need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.

>> No.77374336

>>77373884
Swords might have been sidearms, but there is a difference between army battles and duels. Many of the advantages of spears arose thanks to you having a bunch of spearmen in a closely packed formation, and many of its advantages won't be represented in a duel between two people.
So what OP said, about an unskilled spearman easily beating a trained swordsman is wrong.

>> No.77374391

>>77373497
GURPS

>> No.77374610

>>77373884
if you weren't an autistic midwit you would acknowledge that swords and spears have blatantly different purposes. yes spears are better for battlefield combat. no it does not mean the spear user beats the sword user 100% in a dueling scenario, spears are just as limited by their range as they are enhanced by it.

>> No.77374630

I was working on a homebrew game that started with the advantage of reach and went from there. It's now a vidya me and my brother are working on in our spare time.

>>77373545
Pretty much this. I had them so that if you try to approach someone wielding a spear, the spearman gets an attack of opportunity which, if successful, stops the opponent in their tracks. Early builds of my game gave weapons size categories. If you tried to approach a character with a weapon of a higher size category, you would provoke an AoO. The categories were:
Light
One-handed
Hand-and-a-half
Two-handed
Pole

>> No.77374633

>>77373601
>its more about reaction speed being faster for the spear
That's not going to hold true for an untrained vs. someone very skilled, at all. Reaction times are something that require training. Holding a spear does not improve it at all.
>the reach the spear
Someone who is untrained will have no idea how to maximize the advantage of reach, and will lose this advantage instantly because they didn't know to defend it.
>and how easy they are to use
Spears require training as every weapon requires training. Holding it wrong will get you easily disarmed.
>swords have historically been a secondary weapon to various forms of spears and pikes throughout history exactly for these reasons
By trained warriors.
>but in this case the vast majority of peasants with a spear could defeat a skilled swordsman who just had a sword
No, they fucking could not.
Do you just not realize that militias are trained? They may not live and breathe war like mercenaries and knights, but they weren't just handed a spear and told to go stab.

>> No.77374678

>>77374336
>>77374610
Battlefields and whiteroom 1v1 duels are both fairly irrelevant to the average adventurer anyways. A spear starts to become an impractical liability when you're navigating narrow twisting dungeon passageways, or mucking around in the woods, or climbing ladders, or turning around and fleeing through the nearest doorway when you come something you didn't want to meet. Meanwhile, you can't really go wrong with [insert your favorite sidearm here].

>> No.77374700

>>77373884
an exaggeration of reality, a pistol is closer to the dagger, an emergency weapon
and pistols are not standard issue to modern armies or even WW2 armies, swords were used by everyone who could afford one
the sword was brought with the expectation it would be used, and it was often used after the initial clash of spears and was used for its better wieldiness

>> No.77374706

>>77373601
Counterargument. Roman Legions > Greek Phalanxes

>> No.77374757

Reach is king in all warfare. You should be complaining about how weak slings are.

>> No.77374767

>>77373736
Not him but even Fiore calls the spear the king of duels and he had experience on multiple battlefields as well as over a half dozen more personal attempts on his life

>> No.77374799

>>77374700
>pistols are not standard issue to modern armies
it depends entirely on your role

>> No.77374870

>>77373497
I just happen to take offense to the notion that because a weapon is enough of a whore to propagate itself into hand of every 2-bit conscript this side of Bactria (and on the other side) It's best weapon in history of man.

You know what the first fucking thing we got rid of in the Marian reforms was? The draft. After that was spears. Now, a lot of good men used spears. The Macedonians, Greeks, Pontics, Egyptians, a lot of Italian tribes who weren't us, all of those guys

We killed them all. Every fucking one of those ships went down, with all hands and all spears lost, and evry time it was the hobnailed sandals of Rome that served the iceberg. And you know why? Because of the short sword and shield. So do not talk about spear. I have seen the spear, and it is the weapon of poverty and desperation.

Go and get yourself a shield, and a good, broad bladed sword, and kill a barbarian or two for the honor of Rome.

>> No.77374872

>>77373736
Asshurt swordfag lmao

>> No.77374886

>You say he wears full harness? With my pollaxe, I try to hammer his helmet, so that I can stun him, grapple him to the ground, and jam a stiletto into his visor.
How would you, as a GM, resolve a player bringing out real Harnischfechten in a fight?

>> No.77374903

HEMA has really become a parody of itself, hasn't it

>> No.77374911

>>77374886
Well, I allow him as it makes sense.

>> No.77375043

>>77373497
>>77373601
Here's what pisses me off about this, people take the spear having an advantage over the sword as meaning that in a duel with a spearman against a swordsman, the spearman can always win, it is impossible for the swordsman to win, not even if the spearman is someone who has never held a spear in their life while the swordsman is an experienced fighter.

This is just not true, a swordsman can beat a spearman, especially if he has a great deal of experience over the spearman, it is true that the swordsman is at a disadvantage, especially if things like experience and physical characteristics are equal between both of them, but the swordsman losing is not an absolute certainty. We even surviving manuals explaining techniques someone with a sword can use to defend against someone with a spear or another polearm.

Also, check this video, especially(I use especially a lot, don't I?) from 12:00 onwards: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0HulsThp9U

>> No.77375056

>>77374870
>roleplaying as a Roman legionary on a Vietnamese rice-counting forum
>still doesn't know about how the legions gave up the gladius in favor of the spatha because of its greater reach

>> No.77375084

>the average untrained spearman can easily beat even a very skilled swordsman

>> No.77375166

>>77373497
Spears deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that. I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine hellebarde in Germany for 16,600 Euro (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even stab slabs of solid steel with my spear.

German smiths spend years working on a single spear and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest weapons known to mankind.

Spears are twice as sharp as swords and have thrice as far reach for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a spear can stab through better. I'm pretty sure a spear could easily skewer a knight wearing full plate with a simple forward thrust.

Ever wonder why medieval England never bothered conquering Germany? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Pikeniere and their spears of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the German men with the spears first because their killing power was feared and respected.

So what am I saying? Spears are simply the best weapon that the world has ever seen. This is a fact and you can't deny it.

>> No.77375251

So is the polearm the new katana?

>> No.77375260

>>77374886
Okay, so that's a targeted role against his head? How many damage dice to you convert into target dice? 3? Okay.
> roll 4 damage, 1 target dice lands on head
That's 4 blunt damage to the head, with only 1 ignored by armor due to the blunt damage type. He'll also take a dice penalty of 3 dice for being wounded and an additional 3 dice next turn for taking that blunt damage to the head. So he'll be easy to grapple next turn where his longsword will take a dice penalty for being prone while your stiletto won't. You'll have to wait until next turn to roll for a grapple but if you convert your slow action into another fast action you'll be able to use your stiletto in the same turn.

>> No.77375270

>>77373497
>two-handed weapon
>shield
Are artists this retarded?

>> No.77375274

>>77374886
>Targeted attack to the skull
>Damage roll to see how much damage goes through DR.
>Opponent rolls HT with significant penalty to see if they resist getting stunned
>Next turn, drop pollaxe and attempt to grapple the opponent, with bonus due to opponent shock or stun
>Next turn, attempt to takedown opponent
>Next turn, roll fast-draw to pull a dagger immediately follow by an attack to the face targetting chinks in armor

>> No.77375278

>>77374886
>How would you, as a GM, resolve a player bringing out real Harnischfechten in a fight?
Starting by not playing shitty systems like D&D.

>> No.77375297

>>77374610
Without a shield or armor, the longer weapon wins 100% of the time if both side are equally competent.

>> No.77375300

>>77375270
u fukin wot, helot?

>> No.77375326

>>77375297
That's pretty much how the Romans got away with using shortswords for so long. That said, these "equally competent warriors" don't usually fight in a mental and environmental vacuum, plenty of other factors in that case.

>> No.77375328

>>77375300
>fighting in a phalanx
>1v1 duel
Did you even read the OP's post, retard?

>> No.77375340

Why don't you see pollaxes more often in fantasy? In real life, they were THE iconic weapon for medieval men-at-arms and knights.

The pollaxe was the ultimate armor-piercing melee weapon. Even a glancing hit from a pollaxe could tear straight through a breastplate and cleave apart the ribcage. They were made to kill other men-at-arms and knights and spelled the death of armor on the battlefield.

This is what a pollaxe can do to metal, punches straight through:
https://youtu.be/ZCi-5NI5C7g?t=141

>> No.77375353

>>77373736
>You take one example

all of human history, friend

>> No.77375364

>>77375328
Doesn't change shit, dumbass. You can hold a spear and a shield, even medieval fighting manuals (which focus on 1v1) also cover this. You keep asking if people are retarded, maybe you should ask yourself that?

>> No.77375380

>>77375340
Because it's something adventurers will rarely use? Spear is better if you want to poke something big and nasty as it is better balances and easier to recover after attacks. Battle axe if you want to cut something with the same power as a pollaxe and it is lighter and a little smaller.

Now if we were talking about a mercenary company with closer to 50+ men pollaxe would make a lot of sense. But for small groups they are kinda not so good. Especially since a lot of the time heavy armour will be useless against the king of threats they fight - something big that will squash no matter the armour.

>> No.77375401

>>77373601
>swordsman has to close through the spears strike zone
Shield

>> No.77375406

>>77374336
Lmao, retard. Spears absolutely shit on swords 1v1.

>> No.77375412

>his character uses a sword
You know that swords were never used on the medieval battlefield, right? They were status symbols and sidearms carried exclusively because they were expensive and hard to make, and they had a Christian cross image.

You see pictures of medieval soldiers waving swords around, but that's basically just glorifying a battle by giving it more Christian cross imagery. There are no accounts of swords actually being wielded as weapons in medieval warfare.

And by the way, it's "arming sword," NOT "longsword."

>> No.77375432

>>77375406
Considering shields?
Considering armor?

>> No.77375439

>>77373736
Lindy isn't HEMA though, he's ex-SAS

>> No.77375442

>>77375412
>And by the way, it's "arming sword," NOT "longsword."
Literal retard.

>> No.77375502

>>77375380
Why are you even replying to him? He's clearly shitposting, he fucking wrote "Even a glancing hit from a pollaxe could tear straight through a breastplate and cleave apart the ribcage.", that should make it obvious enough.

>> No.77375521

>>77375412
>And by the way, it's "arming sword," NOT "longsword."
Depends on the context actually, in archeological literature the term "longsword" can be used to refer one handed swords with long blades, such as celtic swords, you can see this in works such as "The Celtic Sword" by Radomir Pleiner.

>> No.77375556

>>77373601
>Lindybeige
That's like anti-proof you dipshit.

>> No.77375573

>>77373601
I guess these guys are pretty retarded for ditching their inflexible pike walls for short swords and shields.

>> No.77375577

using a long weapon in a dungeon or similar closed environment is retarded
swords are shorter and more manoeuvrable

>> No.77375596

>>77375412
Is this a troll? Or are you genuinely retarded? I can't tell at this point.

>> No.77375610

>>77375412
>it's "arming sword," NOT "longsword."
Yeah because most of the ancient word spoke English.

>> No.77375640

>>77375577
>Realistically swinging a sword in small quarters
You are better of wielding a short spear, or honestly, just a dagger.

>> No.77375645

>>77375577
Honestly if you're a pure martial and you aren't lugging at least a long weapon, a short weapon, and something to shoot or toss then you're doing yourself a disservice.

>> No.77375700

>>77375556
How is the video not proof? It clearly shows swordsmen getting fucked over consistently by untrained spear users

>> No.77375721

>>77375270
You can use both your hands with a weapon and having a shield protecting your side, this was largely used. Why wouldn't you do it since a single axe chop can kill you ?

>> No.77375747

Swords don't even make sense. The design means you're hitting the opponent with a long, inflexible steel sheet and it's just as likely to snap as it is cut. Making it mostly out of wood will make it more tensile, but now you're already on your way to just carrying a spear.

>> No.77375766

>>77373497
What I hate is how many games dont allow reactions, take plebfinder for instance (all my group will play, yes I have tried to get them to diverge out), if you have a highr initiative than a longspearman or a polarmsman, you can just walk right up to them, through their threat range, and beat them with your arming sword or mace or whatever. And the best part is the poor guy as to drop his weapon or take a 5' step back if he survives because "reach weapons cant attack adjacent foes" because apparently shortening your grip on your weapon is a mighty feat of combat.

>> No.77375777

>>77375766

Have you tried playing Pathfinder 2e?

>> No.77375787

>>77373497
I have no idea what you're talking about, spears usually have the same damage as a sword and have the advantage of reach and two hand bonuses.
The sword guy is getting stabbed the first time he enters melee and the spear guy gets to stab him again when its his turn.

>> No.77375793

>>77375777
They wont even do that. Its 1E or bust ;_;
Pleaase, I just want to play something, anything else. Coc, AEVA, fucking GURPS, anything

>> No.77375794

>>77375766

Have you tried playing Polearm Master in D&D 5e?

>> No.77375805

>>77375766

Have you tried taking Combat Reflexes in Pathfinder 1e?

>> No.77375809

>>77375766
If the guy has combat reflexes, which dedicated reach users have. Then he still gets to make AoOs while he's flat footed.
And no, he doesn't need to switch weapons. 5 footing away is enough range to stab you again and he can do this until he runs out of real estate.
>>77375777
Dumbed down zoomer shit.

>> No.77375832

>>77373736
>>77374706
>>77375043
>>77375401
>>77375573
i literally said shields and armour change the outcome (as does operating in a unit) and that it wont be true 100% of the time
repeating things i already said as some strawman counterargument doesnt make you intelligent it makes you illiterate

>> No.77375838

>>77375747
You are aware that forging a sword is more than hammering fucking sheet metal into sword shape right?
It's hard metal folded around a softer core, usually.

>> No.77375843

>>77374185
old meme but a welcome one

>> No.77375844

>>77375809
>>77375805
Im talking about a basic bod, a spearlevie or a militia spear, not a PC. Most wont have these feats, but they should still be able to strike at a charging foe before they reach them.
And they have to drop their weapon or move back, Reach specifically states they cant use the weapon against a foe next to them (or within 5')

>> No.77375853

>>77375766
>arming sword

>> No.77375903

>>77375853
Machicolations.jpg

>> No.77375960

>>77375844
A 1st-level human NPC warrior, the very definition of grunt-tier militia, can have Combat Reflexes and Power Attack.

>> No.77375966

>>77375794
You shouldn't even need to take a feat for this. Even a commoner should be able to do these things with a spear

>> No.77375985

>>77375439
Lindy is a known terrorist that committed numerous terror acts in France.

>> No.77375991

>>77375960
No, it have power attack OR combat reflexes. Warriors do not get bonus feats.

>> No.77376006

>>77375364
Also, a lot of of the medieval fighting manuals cover the late medieval period, I imagine shields were much more necessary in early middle ages, when best armor you could get was the mail.

>> No.77376049

>>77375985
Lindy took the banter too far when he burned down the cathedral.

>> No.77376057

>>77375991

But a human does receive a bonus feat, on top of the 1st-level feat that all characters are entitled to.

>> No.77376082

>>77375805
she can combat my reflexes

>> No.77376129

>>77375832
I didn't say anything about shields or armor, I was referring to someone armed with just a sword versus someone armed with a spear. And the reason why I posted that video was because Roland talks about how sharp swords behave differently than blunt swords in some ways, and he mentions that a sharp sword has a much easier time binding against the wooden pole of a spear, which is something that you wouldn't be able to see if you only used blunt swords.

>> No.77376334

>>77375328
>not bringing 299 of your adelphi to help you out in a bind

>> No.77376340

>>77376129
no, you said the swordsman losing isnt an absolute certainty
read the whole post, i already said it wasn't going to be true 100% of the time

binding is a sword on sword thing it comes from needing to exert pressure on your opponents sword because you are close enough that they can strike you - with a spear you have the added reach that if someone with a sword tried to bind you you would have time to disengage and re engage without putting yourself in their strike zone

>> No.77376382

>>77376340
>binding is a sword on sword thing
No it's not only a sword on sword thing, go and watch the video.

>> No.77376428

>>77376382
i did - its just him talking (from 12:00 onwards) with no videos of how binding a 7 foot long pole would actually work when they can draw the apear out of your swords reach and then thrust it back in

>> No.77376438

>>77376428
Well if you're not gonna believe him then this conversation is not gonna go anywhere and we're not gonna reach an agreement. I'm gonna stop wasting my time and just leave the thread.

>> No.77376448

>>77373601
>its more about reaction speed being faster for the spear

What if the swordsman avoids the spear blow and then grabs the spear by the haft while it's still extended, then when the spearfuck tries to draw back his spear, rather than trying to stop it, simply moves with the withdrawal, keeping the spear to his side while lunging with his sword?

I don't care how realistic that scenario is, it sounds cinematic and an appropriate way for a master swordsman to kill a spearfuck.

That or throwing a knife into the spearfuck's throat.

"As a master swordsman, I know when not to use a sword."

>> No.77376467

>>77376428
also, im 90% sure that 'bind' is a term exclusively used in swordfighting (against other swords) because other weapons dont have the same need to engage like that
>>77376438
im not because i dont understand or believe that exerting perpendicular pressure on a spear will stop them drawing that spear back and re engaging you - it just doesnt physically work, which is probably why he doesnt have any videos of it happening. there are ways to get inside a spears reach with a sword, but binding is not one of them, it literally makes you more vunerable

>> No.77376487

>>77375991
>>77375844
Damn, talk about retarded and illiterate. Not sure if you were born stupid or you're just too lazy to learn the most basic knowledge about the game you're whining about. Retards like you really should stick to 5E, maybe even go a notch further and just free form rp. Way easier, less brain thinking for thog who can't comprehend a simplistic game like pathfinder.

>> No.77376542

>>77373601
Aren't these all experienced HEMA niggas? That's a lot different from a being untrained. I think most of what you learn from sword fighting can be applied to the spear as well. I have only done longsword but the book i own has a military drill for 4 different systems of spears from 2 countries and the basics are comparable to sword fighting as well. Also interesting how the spear line broke quite often when the swords just bum rushed. Would be interesting to see fighting in deep ranks.

Jixiao Xinshu stated that in battle ill motivated Chinese rural militia with pikes often lost way against rabid and incredibly aggressive Japanese pirates with swords. If you count discipline as a part of "skill" then i think the answer is more inclined towards the swordsman.

>> No.77376571

>>77376542
To be fair Wokou were crazy motherfuckers, I wouldn't want to fight them either.

>> No.77376631

>>77376542
most of what you learn farming can be applied to a spear its not a very complex weapon
and the motivation discipline thing is true but i feel like its not the sort of matchup op was imagining

>> No.77376661

>>77373601
Lol retard.

>> No.77376695

>>77376631
>most of what you learn farming can be applied to a spear its not a very complex weapon

Are you sure? Sword fighting increases habitual and instinctual movements that farming can't replicate. I don't think farming teaches about stepping back and gauging distance or proper footwork. I don't think any of my grandparents would know stuff like this.

>> No.77376726

>>77376695
youd be surprised anon

>> No.77376765

>>77376695
I know war flails were based on flails that were used to thresh grain, so I suppose a peasant would atleast have some knowledge on how to use one, don't know about a spear though, but I guess learning some very basic spear skills wouldn't take too long.

>> No.77377251

>>77374903
Half of the articles written by hemafags are about women or trannies in the "sport". It's a lost cause.

>> No.77377356

>>77376542
Hematards are trained wrong, as a joke. They're too slow to do anything that isn't in a manual

>> No.77377436

>>77374799
only the machine gunner and officers are given a pistol as standard
whereas swords can and were used by pretty much everyone who could get their hands on one

a sword is closer to a carbine or SMG in function than a pistol, and was used as a complement to their spear rather than a supplement
many soldiers did switch to their sword when the fighting got closer, while pistols will only ever be drawn if you lost your rifle
the medieval equivalent of a pistol is a dagger

>> No.77377576

>>77377356
That's not always true. The reason why i tried HEMA was because you could always experiment with mixing different systems all over the world. I think you just have a negative perception of them that biases your view because the most outspoken HEMA tards state things in absolutes or make theories without academic research. I remember one of the most notable player was an aged boxer who loved teaching me about applying boxing to fencing.

>> No.77377673

>>77373577

>> No.77378147

Lmao here come the buttmad swordcucks getting upset about facts

>> No.77378165

>>77377356
>>77377576
HEMA is literally how they fought in medieval times.

>> No.77378206

>>77378165
why did you @ me

>> No.77378956

>>77374185
This but unironically

>> No.77379257

>>77378165
lol, no it wasn't.

>> No.77379339

>>77374886
>How would you, as a GM, resolve a player bringing out real Harnischfechten in a fight?
play WFRP

>> No.77379429

>>77373883
anecdotes aren’t evidence
youtube isn’t evidence
proof is evidence

>> No.77379438

>>77377356
WTF are you talking about, they get in pits in full armor and basically wrestle with weapons. It's as true as it gets, what form of medieval MA approximation do you partake it?

>> No.77379513

>>77373497
Swords are pretty sad weapons, a hunk of metal you slap and poke with. A real man chops and sticks with a halberd, standing in formation shoulder to shoulder. Unless the swordman is 3 feet away from you, in that case i hope you are good at backpedalling or don't mind breaking your arm.

>> No.77379538

>>77374886
>How would you, as a GM, resolve a player bringing out real Harnischfechten in a fight?
i'd say no, no grappling in my Tttrpg, sorry

>> No.77379561

>>77374678
Spears are good for mucking about, free walking stick

>> No.77379577

>>77374757
This, trained slingers can hit velocities of 100-150mps

>> No.77379651

>>77375412
>There are no accounts of swords actually being wielded as weapons in medieval warfare.

Also, you think swords are a christian thing? Is this bait?

>> No.77379739

My dad makes weapons as a hobby and my boyfriend is a violent abusive benzoaddict with no respect for personal property, so I can tell you from first-hand experience: even a shitty sword made out of a leaf-spring can hack a spear haft to shit pretty fast.

I can also tell you it’s much, much easier than you’d think to destroy any bladed weapon. They are not durable objects, they are precision instruments.

>> No.77379763

>>77379739
HEMA fags will never tell you this because they’re LARPing and it’d be rude to destroy someone’s expensive toys while LARPing

>> No.77379772

>>77379739
Good bait

>> No.77379815

>>77377251
That's not just HEMA, but like half of the posts on /tg as well.

>> No.77379825

>>77379772
I wish I was baiting, this is just my life. I’ve had stitches 5 times. Parts of rural america are like mad max bullshit these days and no one gives a fuck if you’re poor

>> No.77379860

>>77375166
Hellebarde means halberd though, it ain't a spear.

>> No.77379871

>>77378165
The source being books written by your typical effete "arms master" from the VICTORIAN era

>> No.77379887

>>77379860
They are functionally the same, you can chop just fine with a spear if it has an edge. A simple halberd and an edged spear look the same.

>> No.77379910

Spears sre not superior in single combat you dumb faggot. They dominated battlefields because they're very cheap and excellent for formations.

>> No.77379926

>>77379438
In what part of the world are hemaniggers doing melees, because it sure isn't in the US

>> No.77379927

>>77379887
A spear point is very short and weighs very little compared to the head of a proper polearm.

>> No.77379950

>>77379926
I'm thinking of SCA, forget i defended HEMA

>> No.77379979

>>77379871
The Victorians were the most based of all peoples.

>> No.77379992

>>77379927
You can still swing-chop in a swinging arc ending in a lunge, a pole is a pole and not many options here.

>> No.77380156

>>77379992
I mean you absolutely can, but it will be far less effective. The center of gravity of a proper pole axe or halberd is much farther towards the head when compared to a spear. The edge of most spear heads was also rather short, meaning that, if you hit, it's probably with the shaft.

>> No.77380384

>>77373497
Well Savage Worlds alone would let you take the First Strike and Improved First Strike edges. With a reach weapon you'd get a free attack on the first three enemies that enter your weapon's reach. I had a player abuse that in a dungeon with a lot of corners and tunnels, he ended up killing a lot of things before they could actually get to him.

>> No.77380420

>>77373497
the average untrained spearman cannot even beat a young, unarmed girl with adequate training
the gape between a trained and untrained person is so vast, it's not even worth considering
a line of untrained spearmen are just as likely to injure each other as the enemy

>> No.77380434

>>77374391
GURPS doesn't have the opness desired by faggot OP. It actually makes both spears and swords good in different situations and at high skill level difference between two-handed sword and a spear is pretty low when the character combines the base techniques of each respective weapon with staff skill.

>> No.77380444

>>77380420
>the average untrained spearman cannot even beat a young, unarmed girl with adequate training
That's not even close to true unless he hesitates because his opponent is a young girl

>> No.77380448

>>77373601
commonly accepted "facts" aren't worth shit when history has repeatedly shown that sword infantry is a hard counter to pike infantry since 200BC

>> No.77380509

>>77373601
>youtube video

>> No.77380551

>>77374391
If anything, late two-handed swords are one of the best weapons in GURPS.
Spears are pretty great in the hands of a trained user because of their flexibility, but longswords are in many ways just as flexible and deadlier for someone who is both skilled and strong - to the point where the user would probably be worth double pay in a potential army.

>> No.77380568

>>77374886
These are all pretty standard things.

>> No.77380616

>>77380444
The gulf between those trained and utnrained is so vast, that it overcomes even the otherwise absolute advantages bodymass and having a weapon give.

>> No.77380660

>>77374870
>We

>> No.77380723

>>77380616
No it doesn't. Why do you think even low level combat sports have lots of weight divisions? If someone has a foot and 50 pounds on you, you fucking lose, unless you have a vastly better gear.

>> No.77380766

>>77380616
That's why women's national soccer teams lose to high school boys.

>> No.77380799

>>77374886
Well you can't do all of those things in one action, so let's start with the attack to the head first. Throw your initiative die.

>> No.77380820

>>77374870
>Romans didn't use spears
>this is what nu-/tg/ actually believes

>> No.77380910

>>77379739
faggot

>> No.77381089

>>77374886
>I try to hammer his helmet, so that I can stun him,
Alright, so three actions a turn imposes a pretty hefty penalty. You're gonna take two? Okay, so you only get a -2 then.
Fighting -2 vs his Agility. Fail. Do you want to spend a benny to reroll, or commit? You have the Killer Instinct edge? Gotcha, reroll it for free. Success. Distracted or Vulnerable? Vulnerable, good choice. You get +2 for any actions toward him.
>grapple him to the ground,
So you're basically trying to knock him prone in essence. Because of Vulnerable giving you +2, the -2 from Multi-Action is negated. Athletics vs his Strength. Success, nice. He is now Prone.
Alright, new round. Looks like you got a higher card than him this time, so you go first.
>jam a stiletto into his visor.
Alright, thats one action. He's Vulnerable and Prone, so you get a +2 and his Parry is reduced by 2. This is a Called Shot on a Tiny target, so itd be a -6, but with the Vulnerable and Prone modifiers its basically a -2. Roll it. Success, roll damage and add +4 to the roll.
Yeah, that fucker's dead.

>> No.77381232

>>77375406
No

>> No.77381253

>>77375853
>Knowing the correct term fro a sword is le reddit basedjack now
How this board has fallen

>>77375960
At which point are levie going to have both? Typically levie are raised from workers, so it would be more presumable to believe that they actually have Skill Focus feats related to their work.

>> No.77381266

>>77373497
GURPS

>> No.77381590

>>77378165
It's not, it's the best guess people could make and it was written centuries after the fact.

>> No.77381612

>>77373658
That's because not every game designer is a spearfag who has fooled himself into thinking reach is all that matters.

>> No.77381646

>>77374700
>pistols are not standard issue to modern armies or even WW2 armies
Because they're harder to make than a basic rifle and wars with firearms are frequently not fought at pistol range. By that logic, spears are sidearms for bows because bows have more range than a spear.

>> No.77381671

>>77374757
>Reach is king in all warfare
>laughs in shield

>> No.77381751

>>77380820
Pilum were javelins, retard. Soldiers would carry two of them, one lighter for easier throwing.,
Roman tactics called for throwing both of them if time permitted, then closing on the enemy with your gladius and shield. They could have been used in melee, and some were made specifically for this by adding a hand guard to the shaft, but there is no evidence this method was at all common. So...yeah, Roman legions used spears for throwing, but up close relied on shields and swords. Know why? Because when you have a shield wall, and you and your buddies have shorter weapons, you can push in close on some barbarian's spear wall and everyone still has room to stab the shit out of them.

>> No.77381766

>>77380551
>to the point where the user would probably be worth double pay in a potential army.
I see what you did there

>> No.77381829

>>77375251
Spearfags are the hipsters of realismfags, patting themselves on the back for how right they are in knowing that the less popular weapon is ackchyually better, meaning they themselves are better by association.

>> No.77381848

>>77375353
Ha, no.

>> No.77381878

>>77375700
It doesn't.

>> No.77381888

>>77374185
I came to this thread just fir this

>> No.77381903

>>77375844
So you're arguing that someone who's not trained to react quickly in a fight...won't react quickly in a fight? Wow, so insightful. The feats represent the training, retard.

>> No.77381908

>>77380723
>>77380766
in neither case is the opposition completely untrained, nor is it about the equipment making up the difference between untrained and very skilled.
these are disingenuous arguments.

>> No.77381919

>>77375966
>Even a commoner should be able to do these things with a spear
Why?

>> No.77382072

>>77373497

Sword and shield shits all over spear or spear and shield in a 1v1 fight, good luck using your unwieldy poking stick once I close past your danger range, peasant.

The core advantages of spears are that they’re cheap, easily trained and work well in formation. They’re a phenomenally useful weapon because they turn peasants into soldiers, not because they’re “better than a sword”. Swords are more flexible, and frankly more sophisticated (and thus expensive) polearms shit all over both swords and spears, with the exception of when space is an issue.

>> No.77382351

>>77381751
>Pilum were javelins, retard
Javelins are spears, election tourist.
>Roman tactics called for throwing both of them if time permitted, then closing on the enemy with your gladius and shield.
Romans used different tactics against different enemies depending on the situation, like bracing their spears when going up against cavalry.
>They could have been used in melee, and some were made specifically for this by adding a hand guard to the shaft, but there is no evidence this method was at all common.
*laughs in Magnesia, Tigranocerta, and Nisibis*
>So...yeah, Roman legions used spears for throwing, but up close relied on shields and swords. Know why? Because when you have a shield wall, and you and your buddies have shorter weapons, you can push in close on some barbarian's spear wall and everyone still has room to stab the shit out of them.
Reddit memes aren't historical fact, election tourist.

>> No.77382514

The fact remains that the most successful heavy infantry in pre firearm history made extensive use of shortsword and greatshield.

>B-but they had spears too!

We’re establishing the viability of swords not calling spears useless you hypothetical but probably inevitable retard.

>> No.77382682

>>77382351
>Javelins are spears, election tourist.
Google it, dipshit.
>Romans used different tactics against different enemies depending on the situation
But most commonly threw their javelins.
>*laughs in Magnesia, Tigranocerta, and Nisibis*
Your point being...?
>Reddit memes aren't historical fact
I'm sorry you're so buttblasted, spearfag, but that's your problem.

>> No.77382725

>>77382351
>Javelins are spears
Have you not been reading the thread? The discussion is spears vs swords in melee, a spear that's predominantly thrown, like a javelin, is not relevant to that subject.

>> No.77382784

>>77374678
Ok but: extendable spear.

>> No.77382864

>>77382682
>Google it, dipshit.
"a light spear, usually thrown by hand."
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/javelin
>But most commonly threw their javelins.
As I said already, depending on the situation.
>Your point being...?
That you're an election tourist who parrots Reddit memes instead of reading actual accounts?
>I'm sorry you're so buttblasted, spearfag, but that's your problem.
I love how you don't even deny being a Redditor.

>>77382725
>Have you not been reading the thread?
That's rich coming from someone who hasn't read the post chain.

>> No.77382934

>>77382072
>The core advantages of spears are that they’re cheap
A sharp stick is cheap. A good spear is as pricey as a good sword.

>> No.77382967

>>77382934
Not really though.

>> No.77383109

>>77382967
they are though?
good spears are made of specific types of treated hardwood, not balsa like this fags larp
>>77379739
i'll challenge anyone to post a video of someone cutting a spears head off with a sword from a position you'd be in combat because the physics just dont add up in terms of the power youd have to bring to bear

>> No.77383215

>>77380723
Because you're not allowed to kill your opponent? Retard?

>> No.77383287

>>77382934

Your peasant levy don’t get good spears, they get a dagger blade mounted to a stick.

>> No.77383303

>>77373545
i do it like this:
>save up an action to use as a counter
>weapon with longer reach can do a preemptive counter-attack or AoO
>if you hit, the target can choose to abandon its action and fall back again, and you get to keep your action
>theoreticly a spearman can keep away a ridiculous number of targets if he "hits" all of them and they are not foolhardy enough to voluntarily take the hit

>> No.77383330

>>77383109
the metal is still more expensive don't be a tard

>> No.77383545

>>77375412
>They were status symbols
is this edit of some katana copypasta?

>> No.77383626

>>77382864
Wow, you are really desperate to cover up your mistake. By all means, keep throwing out buzzwords like it's somehow an argument.

>> No.77383904

>>77383626
Lol, an actual Roman legionary would have knocked all of your teeth out for insinuating that his cohort exuded "poverty and desperation" every time they braced their pila against incoming cavalry.

>> No.77384041

>>77376695
Using a pitchfork on a farm would give the basics for spear work...

>> No.77384176

>>77383215
So you think that you could whip a 6'6, 250 pound man's ass as long as he didn't have fighting training and you were allowed to kill him? With your bare hands?

>> No.77384216

>>77374185
Came to the thread for this; was not disappointed.

>> No.77384364

>>77374886
If you win your volleys and do the right combo of actions, then sure.

>> No.77384500

>>77384176
Yes

>> No.77384608

>>77383109
You’re right, a sharp metal rod couldn’t possibly cut a wooden stick, what a ridiculous notion. Physics say that wood is like, tough

>> No.77385653

>nice armor bro, too bad my level is superior

>> No.77385840

>>77383904
When did I ever say anything about "poverty and desperation?" Is that why you're coming off so retarded? You got different posters mixed up? It happens to all of us at some point, don't take it personally.

>> No.77385914

>>77383330
true
>>77384608
yeah bro, thats why we use swords to cut down small trees with one hand, and not like, axes or something with full swings that in combat would expose your chest to attack
again, if you want to provide evidence of it feel free, because as far as your logic goes you could cut a tree down with a butterknife youre holding in your foot
weight matters
the resistance of the spearmans grip matters
the hardness of the spear matters
the angle of the attack matters
the force you can exert in a combat swing while defending yourself matters

>> No.77387166

>>77385914
It’s not like cutting down a tree with a butter knife, it’s like cutting a sapling with a hatchet, except your hatchet is thin and long and gets fucked up really fast

>> No.77387583

>>77374886
I run Riddle and this exact scenario is mechanically supported and a pretty sound tactic. Seen it a bunch.

>> No.77388158

>>77373497
>using shield to engage an untrained spear user
>defeating him because in close quarters he is vulnerable
Op is a faggot. Untrained spearman will probably lose to a fucking fist fighter.
Fuck yourself op.

>> No.77388223

>>77381878
Explain yourself

>> No.77388327

>>77388223
I dont think so.

>> No.77389161

>>77387166
its not like cutting down a sapling - its tempered hardwood, not some bendy luve greenwood
and even then you just cant exert the force to do it because doing so would involve exposing yourself to being run through by the spear - its just not a mechanically viable strategy as a single combatant.
>>77388158
i thought they banned the internet in india, esl anon?

>> No.77389429

>>77373497
Your average untrained spear user is helpless against my Manopener.

>> No.77389490

>>77389161
I don’t know what to tell you except that you’re a fucking sperglord and should go outside. The audacity of telling me that things I have seen happen with my own two eyes are impossible, lol. Get a fucking life, nerd.

>> No.77389591

>>77373497
>Since the average untrained spearman can easily beat even a very skilled swordsman,
What

>> No.77389612

>>77373884
>For the most part, the sword was a side-arm. They became iconic because they were what the warrior class had swinging around their hip as they went around their day-to-day. Like a handgun.
>But the spear is a primary arm. A rifle. When knights and samurai went off to war, they fought with spears and lances. Cuz they're better.
Historically everyone who can get a sword did and used it when the opportunity was good. Archers would use them when people got too close for comfort. Even common soldiers like Japanese Ashigaru would carry multiple swords. There's all sorts of historical quotes and citations of horsemen using them.
>"Whereupon I will say that although the squadrons of the spears [lances] do give a gallant charge, yet it can work no great effect, for at the outset it killeth none, yea it is a miracle if any be slain with the spear... Although the first rank may with their spears do some hurt, especially to the horses, yet the other ranks following cannot do so, at leas the second or third, but are driven to cast away their spears and help themselves with their swords." --François de la Noue

>> No.77389639

>>77374799
>it depends entirely on your role
Not him but he's right. People would much rather carry a rifle. Even officers would far rather for many reasons beyond firepower like not having an extra "Hey I'm an officer" indicator when standing amongst those without pistols. Spiper-spotter teams would carry whatever they saw fit but the spotter carrying an assault rifle or designated marksman rifle is more common than you think.

>> No.77389658

>>77381646
>Because they're harder to make than a basic rifle and wars with firearms are frequently not fought at pistol range.
The guys at /k/ would point out many other reasons from firepower to differences in training to all sorts of other reasons besides range.

>> No.77389682

>>77373497
>197 replies with bait this obvious
I don't know whether to be impressed or disappointed..

>> No.77389717

>> No.77389718

>>77375412
No more Shark threads
https://desuarchive.org/tg/search/image/_KvitLYhUj3caIMv3vfdtQ/

>> No.77389839

This one was interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8RWLxlzTiM
Although it also seems like the swordsman was just not as good, it does also indicate the spear is pretty alright if you are trained.

>> No.77389884

>>77373497
There's this thing called game balance.
Reminds me of this one homebrew system made by a friend of mine. Massive weeb, usually a player, but decided to run a Genesys game anyway for the hell of it. The one thing you need to know about him is that he's a huge katanafag. Like, he collects those fuckers and insists that they were better quality than any european sword historically.
In the game he ran, a katana had a 1 Crit Rate and 8 fucking base damage, the highest of any weapon in the game, including warhammers and spears. Needless to say, everyone ran katanas and the game lasted all of two sessions.

>> No.77390164

>>77375432
Considering that swords do worse against both, I don't think that helps your case

>> No.77390335

>>77375260
sounds impossibly slow

>> No.77390919

>>77389490
>The audacity of telling me that things I have seen happen with my own two eyes are impossible
yeah idk anon your whole story about your abusive boyfriend trying to stab you with a spear seems far fetched and considering that we use specialised tools to cut down even softwood trees doesnt exactly inspire confidence in your account
do you even know what wood the spear was made out of? because most medieval spears would have been made out of something like oak or ash, and that those hafts were often hardened as well, and that chopping an oak tree down with an axe, which is designed for it, against a tree, which is rooted into the ground and not braced in someones hand and thus able to give easily, and that in order to swing an effective amount you would need to expose yourself to being stabbed, and all of this just leads me to believe that if this did happen then it probably happened with something like a pine stick with no hardening done which isnt representive of spears at all
like i said, you are completely welcome to post any proof of this happening - i have found videos of people cutting hardwood sticks with swords and while it can happen, most examples are not really combat appropriate, theyre static sticks normally braced upright or between two things and so able to be attacked with overhand or side blows that wouldnt work in combat because the spear is facing you, not angled so you can strike it easily. (and often in these examples the sword still has issues cutting or breaking the hardwood shaft)

>> No.77391086

>>77389161
I thought they banned faggots with their retarded "b-b-but i didnt mention they were X Y Z", in this case both equipped with shields and armor. And you along with them.

>> No.77391110

>>77374630
In what language?

>> No.77391320

>>77375412
I was going to greentext you, but I don't want to get retard on my clipboard.

>> No.77391574

OP is a dribbling smoothbrain bawbag.
There is no melee weapon that holds such an advantage over another that an untrained fighter can reliably beat a trained one, short of putting finger razors up against a no-dachi or something.
Certainly not spear over sword. I don't know what planet OP is from, but we have three dimensions here, and sidestepping and feinting is a thing on EARTH.

I feel it is the tragedy of the internet age that people like OP, who never leave their homes and have no concept of real life and no capacity for critical thought, now have a voice, whereas in my day they'd naturally be restricted to writing angry letters to newspapers and local government, and rightly ignored. Now they can just fart in our mouths and invade spaces set aside for abled people to speak.

>> No.77391602

>>77381908
They are not disingenuous, the ones making them are completely sincere in their retardation.

>> No.77391673

Think about it this way. Compared to spears, swords are very hard and thus expensive to make. Even as a status symbol, why would any noble want a sword if any peasant with a rock on a stick could beat him?

>> No.77391782

I love polearms and this thread is actively making me hate them.

>> No.77391863

>>77382864
Who gives a shit if they're from reddit in the year 2021. It's like accusing them of being from 9gag. Curb your autism a little you sperg fuck

>> No.77391881

>>77391863
A redditor couldn't understand.

>> No.77391899

>>77390919
Literally no one said anything about an abusive boyfriend. She just said that he doesn't give a shit about breaking her dad's weapons

>> No.77391980

>>77391574
Watch the video linked early on in this thread and feel stupid

>> No.77392057

>>77391980
I don't need to see some fatass SCA white supremacist windbag wobbling about to know you're wrong.

>> No.77392080

>>77373497
Wars and battles are more about morale and other factors than weapon systems.

>> No.77392808

>>77391899
>My dad makes weapons as a hobby and my boyfriend is a violent abusive benzoaddict with no respect for personal property
what is it with people who disagree with me and chronic illiteracy

>> No.77392886

>>77373497
It's not so much that the bayonet beats the saber, but the fact that the bayonet is attached to a rifle.

>> No.77392982

>>77380448
holy fuck how can you even breathe with all this brain damage?

>> No.77393128

The amount of swordfags coping in this thread is revealing.
They can't stop being intellectually dishonest about the fact swords without shields or lots of armor are a tertiary, secondary at best, weapon in a battlefield, and in duels loses to anything longer than them, including spears and rapiers.
All that training, all the fetish, all that emotional investment. Reality is brutal.

>> No.77393546

>>77373497
I'm tired of all this new overrating of spears and underrating of swords, so I will address most of the ahistorical nonsense that has been stated here (which unsurprisingly comes from crackpots like Lindybeige and HEMAfags who rely on remains of post-medieval manuals).

>1) Swords were expensive and spears were the weapons of the common man

This is false for a lot of historical periods. In the later Medieval period (c. 1000-1500 AD) more advanced metallurgical and smithing technology made steel production and sword making progressively cheaper. By the fourteenth century not only could poorer men afford a cheap sword, but some laws required even them to own one. In Medieval England the Statute of Winchester (1285 AD) mandated that even men of the poorest class, worth less than £5 a year, were required by law to own at least a sword, a knife and a bow or crossbow.

By the mid-fourteenth century a poorer man could buy a cheap, mass-produced sword for as little as sixpence, and a better quality blade would cost him 1-2 shillings. In the same period a cow cost 12 pence and a horse from six shillings to £2, while a carpenter earned 3 pence a day and a mason 5 1/2 pence a day.

So by the later Middle Ages swords were easily affordable, with price depending on quality, and most men would have been expected to carry one if travelling or to have one around the house To avoid bloodshed many cities and towns passed laws forbidding men to wear swords in the streets and it was customary to take off your sword when entering a house or to leave them and other weapons in the gatehouse when entering a castle or manor house.

TL;DR swords were dirt cheap by the second half of the Middle Ages and were very common weapons used by all.

1/2

>> No.77393556

>>77393546
>2) Swords were merely side-arms that were rarely used in warfare and sometimes were just ceremonial power symbols

Anyone with an ounce of historical knowledge would know that this is simply untrue. Swords were one of the main weapons of choice for many soldiers throughout the ages including the post-Marian Roman legionnaires (they defeated the Greek hoplites and phalanxes and conquered Greece) who relied on a galdius and a large shield for melee combat. The same is true for many medieval mercenaries (such as the landsknechts) and knights in both dismounted and mounted melee combat.

>3) An untrained spearman would defeat a trained swordsman in a duel.

Swords were always one of the main weapons of choice throughout the period because of their versatility in combat unlike shorter weapons, like daggers or the early Medieval "seax", a sword had reach (especially longswords, bastard swords, and great swords that were pretty much polearms in terms of reach) and so could be used in a highly aggressive way and could also be used as easily on horseback as on foot But unlike longer weapons, like spears and polearms, it could also be used defensively. If an opponent got inside your guard with a pole-arm or spear (which can easily be done if the opponent is well armoured or has a shield since spears are thrusting weapons that inflict terrible blunt damage), the only defence was to give ground and get him back in striking distance. But a sword could be used closer to the body and enable a fighter to regain the offensive much more easily. Swords could also be used to parry, riposte, feint and guard much more effectively and with more versatility than most other weapons. So no, an untrained spearman wouldn't easily defeat a trained swordsman.

2/2

>> No.77393836

>>77393556
>which can easily be done if the opponent is well armoured or has a shield
but like... i thought the point of this thread was that they just have a sword and a spear
obviously if you give them armour or shields or a unit of men the equation changes

>> No.77393933

>>77393836
>thought the point of this thread was that they just have a sword and a spear

Which is an unlikely hypothesis to consider. The likelihood of two historical soldiers dueling each other without their own armour and/or shields is quite minimal. There's also other factors that aren't taken into consideration such as the location of the hypothesized duel, whether the duelists are mounted or not, etc.

>> No.77393941

>>77393546
but anon the statute of winchester only required people with more than 40 shillings of land to own swords which was like a tiny amount of the population
actual peasants only had to have 'scythes. gisarrnes, knives and other small weapons;'
and id like if you could share your source on the 14th century thing because afaik 14th century swords were 20 shillings (120 days of work for the average peasant)
carpenters and masons are both skilled labourers and not to be used as a benchmark for the population

>> No.77393955

>>77373601
Why would a.master swordsman not know how to use a shield?

>> No.77393965

>>77384500
Unless you're 230 ibs minimum yourself you're getting ripped limb from limb

>> No.77393979

>>77393556
>and a large shield
Yep, they needed a shield because a sword by itself is pretty much useless. And their swords were just one big dagger that could also cut. Once armies started wearing better armor, nobody fought like that anymore because swords suck against armor.
>landsknechts
double soldiers were basically tactical units meant to defend a position or a person, not normal infantry. They were not big sword soldiers charging positions, and were in the battlefield mainly as a disruptor, pretty much like archers to prevent cavalry advances. Zweihanders were swords, but fighting with them is not like fighting with any other sword anyway.
>So no, an untrained spearman wouldn't easily defeat a trained swordsman.
It's easier for an untrained spearman to defeat a trained swordsman than for an untrained swordsman to defeat a trained spearman. Because spears are better in single combat without shields.

>> No.77394005

>>77374185
>Exotic Weapon
>Spears
>Exotic Weapon
>Spears

>> No.77394048

>>77374185
Imagine being this butthurt that you need to dig old pastas.

>> No.77394085

>>77392808
Both correlate with leftism

>> No.77394229

>>77393941
>but anon the statute of winchester only required people with more than 40 shillings of land to own swords which was like a tiny amount of the population

That's untrue. It was required for people with much less than that.

>It is likewise commanded that every man have in his house arms for keeping the peace in accordance with the ancient assize; namely that every man between fifteen years and sixty be assessed and sworn to arms according to the amount of his lands and, of his chattels; that is to say,

>for fifteen pounds of land, and, forty marks worth of chattels, a hauberk, a helmet of iron, a sword, a knife and a horse;
>for ten pounds worth of land and, twenty marks worth of chattels, a haubergeon, a helmet, a sword and a knife; for a hundred shillings worth of land, a doublet, a helmet of iron, a sword and a knife;
>for forty shillings worth of land and over, up to a hundred shillings worth, a sword, a bow, arrows and a knife;
>and he who has less than forty shillings worth of land shall be sworn to have scythes. gisarrnes, knives and other small weapons;
>he who has less than twenty marks in chattels, swords, knives and other small weapons.

>And all others who can do so shall have bows and arrows outside the forests and within them bows and bolts.

>and id like if you could share your source on the 14th century thing because afaik 14th century swords were 20 shillings (120 days of work for the average peasant)

http://medieval.ucdavis.edu/120D/Money.html
http://www.luminarium.org/medlit/medprice.htm

>Cheap sword (peasant's), England ~1340, listed at 6 pence. The same site lists the daily wage of a thatcher (in the same time period) as 3 pence.

Here you go.

>> No.77394260

>>77379825
Why are you still with a violent benzoaddict?

>> No.77394397

>>77393979
>Yep, they needed a shield because a sword by itself is pretty much useless. And their swords were just one big dagger that could also cut. Once armies started wearing better armor, nobody fought like that anymore because swords suck against armor.

I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of your post. You're an imbecile who spews ahistorical drivel like a wyrm spews fire.

>> No.77394468

>>77394229
>and he who has less than forty shillings worth of land shall be sworn to have scythes. gisarrnes, knives and other small weapons
isnt that what i just said though?
>luminarium
that isnt the source anon, the source is is stowe manuscript 880 (which isnt available online because the british goverment is ass)
and the gross wage of a peasant, as listed by the book he cites for the sword (which cites MS Stowe 880) lists the peasants income as like 1.5 pence a day, before paying rent or anything
which still doesnt change the fact that a sword is the same price as a towel so, they were definitely cheap enough to afford thanks for educating me

>> No.77394509

>>77393979
>not normal infantry
the mainstay unit of the HRE's imperial army... wasn't its normal infantry?

>> No.77394581

>>77394468
>isnt that what i just said though?

The law mandates it for ''he who has less than twenty marks in chattels, swords, knives and other small weapons'' as well, do it was mandated for even people poorer than that to own at least one sword amongst other arms which they can afford.

>that isnt the source anon, the source is is stowe manuscript 880 (which isnt available online because the british goverment is ass)

True, I sadly only have these online links that source the true source as you've said. I wish the British government today released these historical materials to help educate people on the Middle Ages.

>which still doesnt change the fact that a sword is the same price as a towel so, they were definitely cheap enough to afford thanks for educating me

You're welcome and no problem.

>> No.77394596

>>77394581
>do it was mandated
*So it was mandated

Typo

>> No.77394645

>>77376049
Those frogs deserved it.

>> No.77394734

>>77384176
only if i had a spear. OP said so.

>> No.77394870

>>77391602
the truth of your statement saddens me so much.
then i look outside, and i know it to be true.

>> No.77395198

>>77374706
Poor argument, in a head on fight phalanxes always punished legions, it's always thanks to tactical upsets elsewhere that they lost, e.g.the Macedonians attempting to advance through rough terrain at Cynoscephalae despite them already holding the high ground and the rest of their force still trying to make their way to the battlefield, or the Seleucids at Magnesia only falling thanks to the failure of their supporting units (their own chariots causing their left cavalry wing to break, their right cavalry wing deciding to leave the battlefield to fuck around in the enemy camp) and the phalanx, surrounded and realizing the battle was lost, formed square and prepared to march off the battlefield in good order, which they would have done of their elephants, which were in the center of their squares, panicked and ran amok, breaking their formation.

>> No.77395388

>>77391863
Go back.

>> No.77395484

>>77390919
I’m sorry my life sounds like weird bullshit but it’s the truth.
I used to have a large collection of weapons, mostly ones my dad made, and my bf in his benzo phase liked to force me to swordfight with him, which quickly trashed all my swords.

I’ve seen three spear hafts destroyed in mock-combat. One was pine, and yes, pine is soft, one bad hit cut halfway through it and the next broke it. The other was made out of either an old chair leg or a bannister, not sure, but did better - it took five or six hits before the wood splintered enough that the head fell off.
The last one was fire-treated ash, and that one had been made pretty well and ash is a hardwood traditionally used for tools and spear hafts. It survived a couple fights but still ended up with thumb-size chunks taken out of it and eventually snapped.
I had one of those wooden training katanas too and that actually survived sword blows better than anything else did by a lot.

If you have a spear and sword you don’t care about, test it yourself. Otherwise I’ll post a video on here in like a month or two of how wrong you are.
But be warned, using a sword to hack wood DEFINITELY destroys the wood and also destroys the sword.

>> No.77395501

>>77390919
>we use specialised tools to cut down even softwood trees
lmao I’ve cut down wrist-thick trees with a rock
You really should spend less time arguing speculative physics and go outside

>> No.77395545

>>77394260
Because domestic violence is pretty much impossible to get out of. It’s been ten years and he’s been arrested for it twice (and me once) but he controls all my money and destroyed my social life.
I live in a conservative area where the cops and courts won’t do shit about it, their “justice” just put me massively in debt. (and the cops were harassing me for years before that anyways, because small towns are shit)

And he’s mostly only violent on benzos.

>> No.77395654

>>77373884
People who say this are so fucking dumb I swear to god.
The term sidearm, as it is known today, is inapplicable in the context of the sword.
Yes, when on the field of battle, in formation for a charge. The knight would use a lance.
When the charge lost its momentum, they would use a sword to hack into the people around them
When they were doing literally anything that was off the field of battle, or off of their horse. The sword was their weapon of choice.
But this is a “sidearm.”

I’d also like to point out that part of the reason swords are so well known is because they were owned by everyone, including peasants, who had practically no use for a spear whatsoever.

>> No.77398571

>>77379950
The SCA fights with glorified baseball bats whose weight distribution makes it impractical to recreate actual sword techniques.

>> No.77400636

>>77393979
>because swords suck against armor.
That greatly depends on the sword, and even then most soldiers would have something like a gambeson or maybe mail or brigandine, it's not like there were armies of men in plate walking around. The closest I can think of to common soldiers in plate is something like lorica segmentata, and that's not sword proof either.

>> No.77400661

>>77389658
Yeah, but the value of reach is the main point of contention in this thread.

>> No.77400688

>>77374336
The reason swords were the dueling weapon wasn't because they were better for duels - they weren't - it was because when tempers ran hot and a fight broke our or honor was called into question in a civilian context, everyone already had their sword on hand. They didn't go "right mate, give me a second to go home and grab me spear then we'll have at it!" Spears are still better.

>> No.77400718

>>77394260
It's how women work.

>>77395545
Have you ever considered just walking away?

>> No.77400720

>>77388223
The commentary in the video says several times that the different combatants have different levels of experience with their weapons, so they had untrained vs untrained in both, both with experience, and everything in between. But the guy that knew how to use a sword and didn't choose a shitty dinner plate for a shield, was constantly beating the spear users, and once the spear users added a shield their advantage vanished and they started to lose a lot more.

>> No.77400833

>>77373497
The average untrained spearman will get murdered by a trained swordsman quite often, mostly because he won't have the time to react to a beat that tosses him off balance because he's trying to maximize reach without the training to quickly choke back on the spear to prevent the long lever effect.
It doesn't begin to favor the spear until either horseback allows mobility to throwing, or you get into moderate training.
Besides, bow>all

>> No.77400981

>>77384041
>Using a pitchfork on a farm would give the basics for spear work...
LOL have you actually used a pitchfork?
That's like saying every housewife is a trained knife fighter because they cook with knifes

>> No.77401219

>>77381646
Anon, you just accidentally described the standard combat loadout for Samurai for most of their existence. Bows at range, then polearms, then swords as a last resort.

>> No.77401363

>>77395545
idk that sounds like a you problem anon

>> No.77404307

>>77373497
>untrained spearman
do you have any clue how bad at fighting people with literally no combat training are?

>> No.77405139

>>77395545
He should have a tragic accident while fighting you with a spear.
He should be accidentally decapitated, gelded, accidentally dragged around town behind a horse, and then accidentally pissed on and thrown in the dam.

>> No.77405155

>>77405139
Domestic violence should be decriminalized and abusers should get therapy.

>> No.77405343

>>77395545
>living in a conservative area is the problem
Ah, so you're a faggot then. Have you tried not doing that?

>> No.77405565

>>77405155
>They struggle everyday with the fact that they hate you so much that sometime they want to just stab you.
Heads up

>> No.77409196

>>77393979
>They were not big sword soldiers charging positions
Verloren Hauffen

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action