![320px-Espadon-Morges[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/GqSveGE.jpg "320px-Espadon-Morges[1].jpg")
Is there a way to justify the use of swords in a modern or futuristic setting that doesn't negate projectile weapons entirely (a la Dune)?
>>46492400
1. The way we do today: a purely ornamental side arm for officers
2. Bladed sidearns are useful in space stations or during boarding actions in space where a missed shot can cause decompession and air loss
3. They're like plasma torches and cut through thick armor you'd need heavier firepower or simply more expensive guns to penetrate
4. Ignitable gasses
>>46492400
Handwave some bullshit way that gun control would actually work.
>>46492459
>2. Bladed sidearns are useful in space stations or during boarding actions in space where a missed shot can cause decompession and air loss
This. Get hyped for space knife fights.
>>46492400
Pretty easy, just make ballistic armor common. You're a lot more likely to get a sword point into a lightly armored armpit or groin than you are a bullet.
>>46492400
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De2SuYAjrdY
>>46492400
The best way is probably to put some history and pageantry behind it. Future Knights use swords not because they're the best weapon, but because it's tradition... swords are the weapons they've always used, and damned if they're going to abandon millennia of tradition and history on a whim.
Especially if you get religion involved, you can justify a lot of stupid shit with "That's how it's always been done." Humans are not always perfectly rational creatures, after all.
>>46492459
Those would negate projectile weapons, though.
>>46492620
i kind of like this one, You might still use a handgun to knock someone down, then a blade to finish him. A knife would probably make more sense than a sword there, though.
>>46492668
That's an excuse, not a justification.
>>46492400
Because you're in scifi England and no one has guns, just a fuckload of knives, bats, chains, pipes, and just way to goddamn many other types of bludgeons.
Except for the people who do have guns. Then you're fucked.
>>46492902
>Those would negate projectile weapons
Only on space ships
>>46492400
Arch Warhammer did a good video about it regarding 40k. Given Astartes armor is some of the best in the galaxy, most weapons are fairly unreliable when trying to kill an Astartes, and since they're so powerful what with their armor and enhancements they can cause fucktons of damage in melee making it more effective to utilize space marines in close combat in some situations.
>>46493275
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ep8zPCfMB1Q
>>46492400
being an absolute madman
>>46493275
>most weapons are fairly unreliable when trying to kill an Astartes
Except all these AP2 and buckets of dice
>>46493328
>hardcore LARPing
>>46492400
Logically speaking, if most combatants are in full-body, bulletproof armor, and laser, plasma, or electromagnetic guns haven't been invented yet, a guy in power armor with a vibro-sword can kill people dead pretty handily. Also, close-quarter fighting in an enclosed area would rule out explosives.
>>46493275
I think an important question is: is there any reason I should use a sword on an Astartes who is using their own sword to kill me?
Doe it raise my chance of success from 0.002% to 0.0024%? Does it make me better at surviving a melee and thus give my allies more time to try to take it down? Or would I be better off firing whatever weapon I had while trying to get some distance between me and it, even till I'm within arms reach?
>>46492400
Don't limit yourself with ridiculous notions like "realism," and use your imagination. Most of this thread will be useless in that regard, I'm afraid. Many people here are so stuck on what should logically make sense in a grounded setting that thinking in terms of the fantastic is wholly beyond them.
If you really want to do this, don't be one of those people, OP. Stop giving a fuck about history and hard science and start seriously making shit up until you hit a balance of ideas that sounds fun.
>>46493275
This sounds like a fairly good start. Just keep bullshitting with magic and super powers until you find a good balance, and remember, it only has to make sense according to the rules of your setting. Realism isn't in charge here, you are, so think outside that box.
BATTLE AXES
>>46492400
>>46492620
KotOR's explanation was that there was a particular type of energy shield that deflected projectiles because it repelled objects of a certain velocity. This opened up the idea of just running in and kicking the shit out of them with a vibroblade, because the shield couldn't repulse it.
>>46492400
My advice is to either go with >>46493741 or give them a utility purpose outside of combat. Survival knives are more common than combat knives for a reason.
Also, outside of Halo swords don't run out of ammo.
>>46493871
>KotOR's explanation was that there was a particular type of energy shield that deflected projectiles because it repelled objects of a certain velocity.
I'd just like to point out that that feature was lifted straight from Dune and directly referenced in the OP. Apart from that, I have nothing to add except that handguns are the new swords and rifles are the new bows. There's no logical reason to use either in a modern setting except for sport and tradition.
>>46494009
A sword is better at winning extremely close-range combat than a handgun is, handguns are the new and very improved javelin.
>>46493484
But most close-quarters fighting happens in multiple enclosed areas linked together, in which case explosives are A-OK.
>>46492553
>>46494171
>Clearing a building, fragging each room
Sounds like fun.
>>46494200
>>46492553
>>Knives
...
>>46494108
>A sword is better at winning extremely close-range combat than a handgun is
Nope, handgun wins the draw. Easier to conceal, too. I guess swords could be a thug's weapon for the intimidation and since they could have their weapon drawn before attacking, but it's not much more effective than a bat without training, not to mention significantly harder to come by and maintain.
>>46494270
Axes lose to knives, though.
>>46492400
My setting is a sort of modernish setting, with things like magic and undead as well as electricity, modern vehicles etc.
My justification for having swords and guns is that guns don't use gunpowder (given that it doesn't exist there), instead they use magic and shoot arcane blasts and shit.
As a result, the damage they can inflict is weaker and spread over a wider area, so whilst having a full platoon shooting one target will kill it, it's generally more efficient to just stab someone.
It also helps that most of the fighting my PCs do is as a kind of hunting wild beasts for sport type deal, rather than a massive intercontinental war.
>>46493328
I fucking love that human being.
>>46492400
Ok I had an idea, firearm and armor have progressed to the point that projectiles can be extremely powerful for their size, and armor has progressed to the point where the projectile will have to be potent to the point of small artillery.
This evolved to an idea of mine of a guard regiment with carapace and adamantine weave (see the mordian ironguard) able to shrug of small arms fire, well depending on the power there can be bruising or fractured bones, so the only reliable means to combat this was a rail-gun, however due to limited technological ability these are long single shot firearms, through in mobile weapon mounts (tanks and such have become un-viable due to being large targets) and plates to add more protection and it's basically napoleonic warfare.
This means that regimented formations over distance are favored, occupying a town or city is useless unless it's important, if it isn't it can just be blasted away) however sitting on two ends is rather inefficient so armies doing battle will close the distance to increase firepower and prevent larger weapons from wiping out formations, the goal is to get close enough to the enemy it that noone would could use the larger pieces, this also means that loading the large rifle after every shot becomes burdensome, so the swords, axes and bayonets come out.
That's my autism.
>>46494231
Frag is your best buddy. He enters every room before you, to make sure it's safe.
>>46494331
>>46494108
Screw that, I kill both of you with my Bear Hands.
>>46495021
Why not beer hands?
>>46492400
Shadowrun. Guns and swords are equal when there's supersonic, near-invincible fuckers running around.
>>46492400
Make it cost prohibitive. Firing a gun may be effective, but you only have so many bullets. Wouldn't you rather save that shot for when you really need it?
>>46492400
Kinetic Barriers a la Mass Effect. They resist firearms but can be brought down. It makes melee a viable tactic.
Advanced ballistic armour and high-frequency weapons requiring a bulky power-source.
Swords are big canopeners while guns are significantly less effective.
>>46492481
Except then the military and cartels and mob would still have functional practical guns, making them far more effective than literally spear chucking citizenry.
>>46496816
The Yakuza do most of their dirty work with brass knuckles, bats and occasionally short swords.
Guns are for special occasions cos they're difficult to get hold of and risky to carry around.
>>46492400
As tools of terror or intimidation. Watching your local grocery owner get shot is horrifying, but watching him get a broadsword through the skull is gut-wrenching. It wouldn't be used for fighting though, except as a last resort.
>>46493484
Tell that to my ork.
He dueled an eldar with two stikk bombs.
>>46496786
Huh, I actually tooled around with a similar concept for a short story before.I was literally just looking for a justification to have melee combat and proto-knights in a very-near-future setting.. What I came up with basically boiled down to:
>New material has been developed (something something carbon links technobabble)
>Incredibly high strength relative to its weight
>Fairly expensive to produce, but not exceptionally so
>However, high temperatures severely weaken the material, particularly past ~800°c
>This makes it somewhat unsuitable for vehicle armour due to the threat of HEAT warheads
>Just fine for infantry armour though, making soldiers essentially immune to small arms, most shrapnel, and even HMGs
>The material is too expensive to be standard-issue, instead used for full-body suits for elite units
>The material proliferates, first armour-on-armour fights happen
>Nobody can think of a practical way to design infantry-based ranged weapons that can reach the required temperatures to break the armour
>Superheated tungsten-based melee-weapons develop as a stopgap measure until somebody comes up with something better.
>>46496889
I like it.
That would work flawlessly in GURPS.
>>46496838
That and it's the difference between 'Going to jail for a few years' and 'Going to fuck off jail for fuck you amount of years'
Knives? You can argue it was a crime of passion/self defense. A gun? You go to jail and you rot there.
>>46496889
Not to fuck up your idea, but wouldn't incendiary explosives/ammunition be the simple answer to this?I hope not because I really like it
>>46497398
I haven't really crunched the numbers for that aspect yet, but in my conception a small-arm sized incendiary bullet just wouldn't really carry enough overall thermal energy to have a significant effect. To my knowledge, incendiary ammo really only has a small amount of some incendiary compound in the tip that's primarily there to set off the explosives located behind it. So you could kinda handwave that away that so little energy can only really attack the material at the very surface, and/or that the actual bullet part shatters against the armour before most of the heat is actually transferred.
>>46492400
Personal energyfields that block anything that moves at supersonic speeds combined with armour.in b4 Dune
>>46492400
Why not just go the same route as 1996's Romeo and Juliet? Paladins with "Longswords".
>>46497596
What about incendiary explosives though? Wouldn't having a huge burst of fire covering your body fuck up the armour enough to be susceptible to gunfire at the very least?
>>46497695
Forgot to attach pic.
>>46494108
>A sword is better at winning extremely close-range combat
And a knife is even better then that, handguns are meant pretty much solely for use at the kind of ranges a sword might be useful (~10 metres distance) and by the time you get to short enough range that the handgun does have issues (if ever, handguns aren't that long) you'd be much better off with a knife seeing as we'd be talking about two people in an elevator kind of distances.
>>46492400
Is there a way to justify making the exact same thread every two days in a board that has multiple off-site archives?
This might be informative for you OP, melee weapons were used extensively during the first world war.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIGIBJeRfnQ
>>46497762
>~10 metres distance
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, because I know little about fighting other people realistically, but is that really the engagement distance for a meter-long piece of metal held in a meter-long arm?
That sounds like the distance at which a pike wall is trying to fight at.
>>46497795
Yeah maybe that's a little too long, I was including the distance you might be able to charge. But handguns aren't that good at long range shots, they're not very accurate weapons inherently because you can't brace them against your shoulder BUT they're extremely good at the sort of close ranges you'd be able to use a sword because they're so small and light and thus easy to point. There's handguns out there which are pretty much designed around being used at point blank range, like pressing the barrel against your target sort of range, and they were extremely popular (think derringers and snubnose revolvers).
>>46497706
Those would be a problem, particularly if they're thermite-based. In that case you probably wouldn't even really have to shoot the poor sod afterwards, the sheer heat would probably do it on its own.
However, to actually achieve that, you'd still have to more or less score a direct hit on a moving person with a grenade-launcher or something of the sort, which is no small challenge. Those things are fairly low-velocity and your target is probably going to be moving and trying to take cover. Small-scale HEAT grenades in the 40-60mm range might also do the trick, but once again there's the difficulty of scoring a direct hit with a bulky weapon on a small target.
>>46497791
Well, WWI still had cavalry, but yes, thing is, nowadays there aren't any "real" wars, everything is fought at kilometers of distance between, artillery, bombs, ICBs, drones and cruise missiles, buildings are often cleared with explosives before entering and infantry fights in the open are still very long range, so there's little to no reason to carry extra weight.
>>46497795
Ten metres is certainly waaay past where a sword can attack without a lot of moving in first.
Hell, a really long infantry pike is highly unlikely to let you hit anyone more than maybe five metres away.
Those ten metres probably come form the 21 foot rule (with a few extra metres tacked on for some reason) of modern day self defence and police work. So it'd be about how close someone with a sword could get before you need to get your gun ready to go, because closer than that and he can shank you before you have time to draw, aim and fire. Obviously 21 feet is a pretty arbitrary number.
Now if you do have your gun ready to go, or if we're looking at sword vs sword, or some other scenario that isn't "he has a knife in his hand, you have a gun on your hip" then the 21 foot rule isn't really applicable.
>>46497791
I usually very much enjoy this dude's videos, but those melee combat examples towards the end are kinda bad. He has of course a point in that shorter weapons are more handy in cramped environments, but the parts where he just lazily parries the bayonet thrust from standoff range and easily steps closer with no resistance is pretty silly.
>>46497915
Yeah I know that, obviously combat advanced from that point in such a way that rendered those melee weapons irrelevant (submachine guns for instance) but if you had some sci fi technology recreating that situation, like everyone wearing armour too thick to be penetrated by man-portable fully automatic weapons you might be able to justify the return of that kind of combat. I just thought it was interesting because we have extensive melee combat in a 20th century conflict, one which we usually think of as relatively modern
>>46497953
Yeah that was a bit silly.
>>46493328
Came to post this. Glad to see I didnt need to
>>46497966
Well, machine guns were present in WW1 too, thing is, I could see melee weapons being viable when boarding a space ship, basically similar to WW1 a place where you need to push in and not simply stand still (like modern war) still a bomber/drone/missile comes in to break the stall.
>>46496767
That's from Dune, though.
Ceramic armor not good enough of an excuse for you?
>>46492400
Modern-day or future setting, mildly dystopian. As part of a crackdown on gang warfare, all major cities and most towns have been equipped with gunshot triangulation sensors, in addition to the standard omnipresent surveillance cameras. Firing a weapon automatically flags your location, highlights footage of the area in video logs, and alerts law enforcement to respond immediately. This footage generally exonerates lawful uses in self-defense, however gun owners are subject to increased scrutiny by government officials as potential malcontents (why don't they trust the party to keep them safe?).
The sensors stations are sophisticated, robust, and installed with overlapping areas of effect, meaning they cannot be easily disabled to mask fire in an area. If a sensor is disabled, it alerts law enforcement to the fact. The sensors are sensitive enough to usually detect shots fired through detachable or muzzle-only silencers, though less reliably. An integrated silencer renders the shot undetectable, but such weapons are highly illegal, with penalties for possession starting at ten years with a maximum of life imprisonment if convicted with probable intent to commit a further crime (possession is generally judged sufficient proof of intent).
This balances the effectiveness of firearms in ending a fight with their tendency to drag you into much larger fights. A basic firearm becomes an Oh-Shit insurance policy, for moments when you're going to get fucked up either way. Silencers offer the chance of semi-regular use in certain areas (i.e. further from city centers where fewer sensors overlap, areas where sound travels poorly like parks and woods), but still carry a risk of discovery. A character who invests heavily can get a truly undetectable weapon like a VSS, but they're still somewhat limited by the drawbacks of subsonic ammo and the fact that law enforcement attention has now become an effective instant-kill.
>>46498078
Deus Ex was nice
>>46493504
>I think an important question is: is there any reason I should use a sword on an Astartes who is using their own sword to kill me?
The logic is basically this:
A melee weapon is usually better than a firearm at melee range (this is largely true in reality as well).
You can't stop an Astartes from getting into melee range of you if he want to be.
Therefore, having a melee weapon of your own is a good idea.
This logic also works for Orks, Eldar, and cultists, although the last of those generally amends point 2 to read "you can't stop them ALL from getting into melee range"
>>46498094
Never played it, actually. I was just spitballing ideas.
How would 7068 alu alloy compare to carbon steel?
>>46498148
>A melee weapon is usually better than a firearm at melee range (this is largely true in reality as well).
The 21 foot rule?
That's if you still have to pull your weapon while the enemy surprises you by charging at you.
Sometimes technologies just get lost, greek fire is a god example. Or roman recepture for cement, supposedly better than what we have now. Considering how you're most likely going to bullshit things anyway since it's fun and pretty much necessary while constructing fantasy/sci-fi/horror settings, you can easily say that for some reason it happened to, say, majority of cost-effective ways of producing firearms and/or just ammo in the setting. Additionally, it's fair to just explain that majority of cultures has something againist firearms usage but not blade or bludgeon weapons.
Personally I'm going for a similar explanation, the only firearms left are either magic-powered oddities for eccentric wizards (mostly big game or bounty hunters who like to show off and disregard common social/religious norms), relics from the past worshipped by isolationist religious nuts (one-off experimental weapons) or basically parade weapons for the rich and powerful who for different reasons don't follow any of the philosophical doctrines frowning upon firearms.
>>46496889
That entire thing is literally negated by flamethrowers, and made outright suicidal by thermobaric weapons. Hell, unless the material has some outright bullshit properties like negating force (in which case why the hell wouldn't you use it for the myriad other applications of this technology instead of as body armour when it's so limited), then the person wearing it is still going to be fucked by the kinetic energy large caliber projectiles and explosives can bring to bear.
>>46498269
When I said "melee range", I meant it literally, i.e. the length of your arm plus that of your weapon.
My point is that if an Astartes wants to get that close, he's probably going to get there.
>>46496542
It's safe to say, in a world where bullets can be dodged, swords and guns have parity.
>>46494009
>>46494108
>handguns are the new and very improved javelin.
I'd argue for light crossbow or shortbow. shotgun is the new javelin
>>46494351
not if you're trying to cut something cut resistant...
>>46492400
because the human race likes to stab things?
most melee weapons are minimum tech lethality, easier to make, faster and simpler
>>46492902
>Those would negate projectile weapons, though
It really wouldn't, though. Size of the ship comes into play in this case so if you're taking a smaller ship then, yeah, space knife fights. But once you've breaches a battleship or such and have gotten into the guts of it where you don't have to worry as much about penetration then you can use the dakka dakka part.
>>46498602
Oh, I forgot to elaborate on that, but those armoured soldiers wouldn't be using those melee weapons as their primary armament. They'd still be using regular guns 90% of the time since the overwhelming majority of their targets would be regular soldiers in contemporary kevlar+trauma plate at best. So most of the time they'd just function like regular infantry, except much more hardy and able to keep pushing forward against otherwise unsurmountable odds.
The whole superheated blade thing was mostly just intended as a relatively lightweight and portable sidearm to be carried in case they did run into somebody with the same kind of armourand to satisfy my sword fetish.
>>46492400
Everyone is missing the biggest point of all.
Skeleton soldiers are hard as fuck to kill with bullets.
>>46498886
Skeletons are super vulnerable to explosives though.
>>46498886
You're right, but if those skeleton soldiers can use guns (don't see why they couldn't) then it's not very wise to charge them with swords. Also, while skeleton would be bit harder to hit than human soldier, a rifle bullet would still have enough energy to break their bones pretty badly possibly causing loss of "limbs" or deadly spine cracking in worst case.
>>46493504
One word:
>estoc
Get yourself a power estoc and shank dudes in invincible armor through the joints.
>>46493871
"Slo-shields" were a plot device in a sci-fi book called "Rats, Bats & Vats", where aliens had "soft energy" shields that flash - hardened when they detected the approach of anything traveling more than ~22 mph. This made conventional military assaults useless against them. The aliens who were on our side warned us against using lasers, and heavily implied it would cause a nuclear explosion.
So, humanity is stuck holding a defensive line right up against their big force field, until the clone protagonist of the story got a chainsaw, pesticide sprayer full of gasoline with a tiki torch, and a lawn tractor. It was a very botanical counter - invasion as he and a bunch of uplifted animals staged an accidental counter assault inside enemy lines.
>>46499402
>"Slo-shields" were a plot device in a sci-fi book called "Rats, Bats & Vats", where aliens had "soft energy" shields that flash - hardened when they detected the approach of anything traveling more than ~22 mph. This made conventional military assaults useless against them. The aliens who were on our side warned us against using lasers, and heavily implied it would cause a nuclear explosion.
Damn, that's... pretty much literally Dune. Like copied 1:1
>>46499402
Wouldn't a chainsaw's blade trigger the shield?
>>46499487
Not, as the protagonist discovers, at half-speed, where it is fast enough to cut xeno-chitin, but not trigger the shield. The chainsaw works out pretty well for him, until he gives it to someone else, and their first instinct is to use it at full speed, which snags the chain and snaps it.
>>46499487
Or most swung weapons, especially longer ones? If you do it right you can swing weapons fucking fast.
>>46494200
I laughed when I saw this, it just looks so silly.
>>46492400
The projectile weapons, in order to penetrate the ever-improving super-armors, have had to increase their caliber higher and higher and thus take very long to reload.
Therefore, most uses of projectile weapons involve firing a single round, then extending the blade component of the weapon and initiating close combat.
>Space musketeers! Fix bayonets!
>>46499475
Isn't the ability to nuke the surroundings with a laser attack a really exploitable weakness?
>>46499822
But there's no logic in that. Ever improving super-armors would have to be powered and powered armor super-strength. Super-strength means that you can wield and use automatic weapons of very big caliber. Not to mention that there is no reason why big caliber weapons would be have to be single loaders aside their weight and recoil, but that applies to single shot weapons too.
>>46499913
It is. In one of the Dune books they used what amounted to a suicide bomber with a laser weapon to breach the defenses of a strongpoint once.
>>46492400
I had an idea about a setting where it's basically modern day but guns simply weren't invented until about 150 years ago (Because of ancient conspiracy keeping certain tech down, if you're curious). Since then they've advanced rapidly compared to our timeline, but are still only are around mid 19th century tech. No real machine guns, automatic pistols and bolt-actions are just coming out, most guns are single shot though metallic cartridges are utterly widespread. Revolvers are the current height of widespread firearms tech.
Guns are powerful, but slow and somewhat awkward. Plus, the advanced materials of our time allow close to modern ballistic armor that can easily handle many of the firearms available for a few shots. As a result guns are widespread, but so are melee weapons. It's a transitional period where a soldier will be armed with what's essentially a 1873 Trapdoor made of much better, modern materials and propellants with a mass produced side sword at his hip and armor that's a mix of steel plate, kevlar, and ceramics.
>>46494270
That one's not a bad solution. Guns exist and are great, but there's difficult ways to make them unusable in a certain area, requiring melee
>>46493328
It's like when you haven't updated that one unit in civilization
>>46494331
Not sure how well it applies for swords, but ever heard of the 21 foot rule?
>>46493328
If he were alive today he probably would be fighting ISIS on horseback.
>>46500337
The important thing to remember about the 21-foot "rule" is that it only states that the gun-user is in danger of being stabbed (if he's unprepared with a holstered gun). It does not mean that the knife-user automatically wins. The most likely outcome in such a scenario is that the knife-wielder rushes in, stabs the gun-wielder, and is in turn shot half a dozen times at point blank range because knives aren't very immediately disabling and adrenaline is one hell of a drug. So even in this best-case scenario for the knife it still most likely results in a 'draw' with both combatants bleeding out, while in almost all other situations the pistol has a clear advantage.
>>46500337
You don't really understand 21 foot rule. It assumes you have your gun in a holster that isn't a quick draw one and you can only react after the attacker has pulled out his weapon or started running. Basically with handgun a it would be like 100 meters rule.
Also the rule uses a knife that's easier to quick draw.
>>46496889
HEAT penetrates via kinetic energy, not thermal effects.
>>46500502
Or trying to gather support for a proper Crusade.
>>46499774
In Dune, there's a specific way of fighting where you strike quickly but slow down at the last moment to pass through the shield. It gets mentioned a few times, particularly when Paul Atreides (rich space kid who's been trained in rich kid dueling techniques) is knife fighting a native, who becomes upset that Paul is pulling his strikes, implying to the natives that Paul doesn't consider his opponent a threat.
>>46500666
says the devil
All fights that go on long enough where both sides are committed to not running away will eventually break down to hand-to-hand combat. Google Zulu War and how the advanced and superior guns of the unstoppable British empire got their shit pushed in by a bunch of dudes with spears and shields because they didn't think they would ever need to train in melee combat beyond how to affix and stab with a bayonet.
>>46494270
I really do have to watch lotgh.
>>46492400
I can think of three, but they're all niche.
1) A setting that's not so serious, where there's an "audience" and the players get bonuses for doing stuff that looks/sounds cool rather than what's practical.
2) Class warfare. Guns are more useful in any real fight, but Swords are a more elegant weapon for a more civilized age. The noble class is are the only ones allowed to carry swords, and they use them for dueling. Guns are for the common man, and looked down upon for being skill-less, point-and click weapons of war, while swords are used by the elite--not because they're more effective, but because of social reasons. As a result, wars can be settled via duelling.
tl;dr katanafags are the noble class and are as sanctamonius as ever.
3) Swords are used by an alien species who specialize in them. Using guns against them is much more effective, but if you do that they won't respect you. If you can go toe to toe with them in sword combat, however, you can win their respect. It's up to you whether you actually care about that sort of thing, though. As an added laugh, make them endangered because they cling to pride rather than practicality.
...I can't decide whether I'm supporting swordfaggotry or taking the piss out of it.
>>46492400
step one: everyone has super-armour, in the form of bullshit force-fields or whatever
step two: melee weapons have some kind of bullshit generator in their hilt that imbues the weapon with force-fields of their own, that makes them more effective at cutting through shields. naturally the bullshit generator is too big to install into bullets, too expensive for expendable ammunition, and maybe it fucks up the flight of projectiles or something i dunno
step three: projectile weapons can still bring down bullshit forcefields, but more slowly than a melee weapon
et voila, melee weapons are high-risk high-reward weapons that can immediately bring down an opponent if you get into close range, projectile weapons are valued for their range but aren't as damaging. naturally combine with power armour and augmentations so melee users can run around like animu characters.
The way I do it in my setting is that heavy power-armor is very resistant to small arms, and a freq bayonet or sword is more convieniant than a rocket launcher. So, melee weapons are rare, because this level of armor is rare, but it'll happen around the PCs a lot because story. Basically you have "knights" which carry melee weapons, and regular Infantry, who use railguns on each other, and bayonets on "knights"
>>46492400
>is there a way to justify not using guns?
You are facing a foe that doesn't die from shock or bleeding out.
Bam boom, you have removed 99.999% of the killing power of the majority of bullet systems, and raised the number of bullets needed to take down the target exponentially without altering the amount of blade strikes you'd require that much.
>>46506841
It's crazy how fetishistic people get about guns just because they're really good at killing meatlings.
It takes MUCH bigger guns if you want to damage anything that isn't a soft target.
If you're fighting something as armored as modern tanks, you can't even kill those with bombers. You need to take guys in with wrenches and welding torches if you want them taken down.
>>46506892
>If you're fighting something as armored as modern tanks, you can't even kill those with bombers. You need to take guys in with wrenches and welding torches if you want them taken down.
Holy shit. There is a man on the internet who legit does not know what an anti-tank missile is for.
>>46506986
anon, read the service history of an abrahms.
Those things take multiple antitank missiles, and one famous incident has one taking several and anti-tank rounds from nearby tanks.
>>46492400
Tech that makes ranged shooting less reliable than it is now - personal forcefields, amazing body armor... that's all I can think of.
>>46507009
The Abrams has only ever fought startlingly incompetent kebabs with out of date soviet monkey-model equipment.
>>46509742
it's notoriously hard to slag even for its own forces in the cases it has to be abandoned.
>>46509815
And the Saudis are hilariously incompetent. Plus you never use missiles for that, it's a waste of money
Just an FYI
Arms reach. Is hand to hand combat. Where grappling and knives are king. Swords and longer weapons are pretty useless here unless you already stuck some fool in the gut. Same goes for small arms. A single slap is all you need for their shot to go wide.
That said in CQC where melee weapons are relevant so too are small arms.
The only advantageIcan think of for melee weapons is that IF you can bullrush someone with small arms then your first hit can knock them off balance enough that they can't shoot you and you can combo hack/slash until they are mince meat.
You'd prolly get shot before you reach them though. So it comes down to future armour vs projectile arguments that people keep throwing around.
>>46492400
Absurdly strong beings use blades made of neutron star matter, fairly useful for wrecking shit
>>46492481
In Hong Kong and Japan it's actually pretty difficult to get a gun and as a result the Yakuza and Triads use knifes a fair deal
>>46496816
>If you make guns illegal, only illegals will have guns.
>>46507009
There's at least on case where an Abram was shot by a friendly Abram and was instantly disabled.
>>46513225
Some sauce with that
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/four-held-after-triad-boss-is-disembowelled-and-hacked-to-death-with-meat-cleaver-outside-hong-kong-8595400.html
asianuniverse.net/forums/7_slashes_kill_Triad_Boss_t177617.html
>>46513225
Not really sure about Hong Kong, but one has to pay in mind that Japan has really low crime rates to begin with because of confucian values, high employment and generally society working like clockwork.
>>46492400
The best justification I ever read was transhuman or androids. A quick-moving melee combatant is almost always at an advantage in interiors of buildings and close quarters.
>>46497995
>WITNESSED
Always good to see you, Immortan Joe.
>>46512502
This just makes me think of some kinda crazy sci-fi cavalry being guys in power armor with jets that fly at fuck you mph using drill like energy lances.
>>46515162
Probably not what you meant, but it that made me think of this guy.
>>46515162
It would be far more to have said sci-fi cavalry to just fire enemy at enemy with fuckhueg autocannons. Then again that's pretty solid concept if Dune-like shields are used unless the knights move too fast which might be problem with jets.
>>46515352
Well, if you're going to fire enemies at your enemies, you're going to have to pick some up first, and then you might as well subdue them with a lance to the face on the way there.
>>46515415
Oh god, what I have done.
A lot of post seem to be talking about armor
But what is you have individuals who don't need it
Who can just run in at super-speed and cut some shit
>>46506892
>If you're fighting something as armored as modern tanks, you can't even kill those with bombers. You need to take guys in with wrenches and welding torches if you want them taken down.
Holy shit. Shut the fuck up. Stop triggering my /k/ autism, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
>>46515415
Indeed, a shishkebob of enemies would slow the knight's approach enough to let it punch through a deactivated, unaware force shield!
>>46515913
>>46516153
When you have psychic powers like those, the question is what need have you of a sword?
>>46515913
they don't have super armour?
>>46516221
For when you're fighting other people like yourself.
>>46516234
Is there any particular reason I don't see force user using force powers on other force users very often? I've seen them do so and it doesn't look like they have any particular resistance but they don't use it nearly as much as they do on non-force users.
Weak telekynesis as common power. Not appliable to living objects, not strong enough to stop or redirect a sword. But good enough to jam a gun or maje it misfire
>>46493402
>tabletop
>lore
>same thing
>>46498828
You really don't know much about space ships.
The shuttle plans have the walls packed with wiring, equipment, tubing, and systsm controls. It's dangerous to fuck with any part of it.
>>46516314
Even if they're not the same a Space Marine in the lore can still be taken down by a melta gun or krak missile, can't they?
And if they can survive the hit they're generally not gonna be able to fight for the rest of the day/week.
>>46504608
The masses of spear-chucking Zulus are a myth. The Zulus had plenty of muskets and rifles on their own side, and captured a number of British rifles as the war went on.
>>46516344
It'll be fine. The ships in sci fi always have backup systems. If you mess up one part too much the ship engineers or AI will attempt to localise the problems and maintain the areas that still have access to proper life support and power. At least for big ships.
>>46516282
Part of it would be that anything you could do, your opponent could probably counter. For example, if you push them, they just push back. I remember that in particular happening a lot in Anakin's duel with Obi-Wan. There's also the fact that jedi are pretty resilient and acrobatic. Even if you push them, it's not gonna mess them up to much, and they'll probably just jump right back at you.
Another thing to consider is differing skill sets and power levels. Dooku didn't use force powers a lot because he prided himself on his skill as a duelist. Palpatine used them a lot, because he's a cheeky fuck who'll do whatever it takes to gain more power.
But most of all, it's probably just a matter of special effects budgets. It's been a long time since I last saw the Clone Wars shorts, but I remember the showings of force powers generally being more impressive than the movie counterparts, save for the fight between Palpatine and Yoda. It's probably a lot easier to animate an impressive fight scene with a lot of crazy powers than it is to create it with film, CGI, and motion capture.
>>46516401
True and when considering viability of medieval weapons versus guns there is the case first Sino-Japanese war in 1894-1985. Most Chinese army back then was actually medieval while Japanese had modernized their army up to standards of that age. Needless to say that Japanese practically steamrolled the Chinese.
>>46507009
>muh unkillable Abrams
Sure, they'll laugh off a musty old PG-7VL, but ISIS have killed a number of Iraqi Abrams with modern Russian launchers.
>>46516473
I know this is assburgerific nitpicking, but would like to point out that PG-7VL is designation for rocket rather than launcher and that there are (tanded warheaded) rockets for RPG7 that can penetate an Ambrams.
>>46497706
Why worry about incendiary explosives? The fucking pressure blast would liquidate a man's internals, the armor only decides how big the splatter gets.
>>46516449
Thats probably why Grievous wrecks everyones shit in Clone Wars but does fuck all in episode 3
>>46516532
I know; it's why I didn't say RPG-7.
>I wonder how that would feel going up my butt
>>46516712
Explosive anon.
It would feel explosive, and also probably cold.
>>46496889
>something better
So, pic related.
>>46494270
>Posting lame republic shock troopers
>not posting superior and way cooler imperial troops with double headed axes and better looking armor
You had one job, anon
>>46516701
Yeah, it was honestly a really disappointing fight. Like, he lost two hands almost immediately, which practically removes the whole point of Grievous in the first place.
you need visibility for projectiles to be functional. all you need is some kind of mystical vision inhibiting context.
>>46492400
i love fading suns in that aspect.
Fading suns is medieval age on space, after a second galatic republic falls.
So you have noble houses, priesthood and guilds that controls the tech.
Only the free man can have it and energy shield were pretty common in the second republic.
So the common folks fights with arrows and swords.
The free man have guns ,but also swords. Personal Shields can stop low caliber single shots unless they are military ones.
Also there is super light bullet proof armor that is everywere. So you have people that dresses fasionnable bulletproff armor and have a ring or an amulet thats its in reality an energy shield.
In conclusion you have a society in wich melee combat is a ritual social tool (dueling).
And is used vs criminals and bandids or while assaulting ships.
Of course in conventional warfare they are not unless cool factor is necesary.
Its a good rpg.
Mass Effect had a pretty plausible idea built into the setting that they promptly forgot about when they introduced melee weapons into the game in 3.
The Force Fields that they have stop things moving at reletiveistic speeds, but in order to allow them to touch things without pushing them away the force fields do not react to slower moving objects. Thus a melee weapon could bypass the shield
