In real life bows take 100-200lbs of force to fire and require a lot of strength while swords need agility and speed to be effective. Why do videogames have it backwards?
Because the bow is a woman's weapon. A man fights his enemy face-to-face.
>>316574964
Because you're wrong and both weapons require both strength and dexterity IRL as well as endurance and intelligence. Try harder.
Only the most exceptionally strong longbows have that kind of draw weight. Reurve bows are much lighter, around 50 pounds.
It's also not just a matter of being able to pull the weight, but do it in such a manner that you remain steady and can hold it on target.
They both require strength, you're thinking of rapiers and shit which didn't get used in large scale combat, and games generally make them use dex anyway.
swords are side arms a weapon of last resort
>>316575105
You're right a baby probably couldn't use a sword well because of his lack of strength, but literally anyone else could.
So most swords should have a strength requirement of about 2/10?
>>316574964
>Reurve bows are much lighter, around 50 pounds.
>taking a faggot tiny bow into battle
Enjoy dying.
>>316575072
>most common weapon in history is a spear
>>316574964
small swords require dexterity, big swords require strength. wtf are you getting at?
>>316575105
Truth. All weapons require a balance of all stats. The human body needs some of everything. There are no dump stats in real life, brah.
DnD
>>316575349
Wrong. Big swords are made to be as balanced as possible, otherwise they would be unusable in combat. It's not like you're swinging around an axe.
>>316575358
>get enough strength/dex/endurance to use to sword
>dump rest of my stats into int
>100% crit chance
>>316575358
That's not entirely true. A bodybuilder is going to be a pretty shitty cyclist and vice versa. There literally are two very different types of muscle mass.
>>316575140
>Reurve bows are much lighter, around 50 pounds.
mongols used bows that were in the same draw weight range as longbows. others did probably too
>>316575258
Recurve bows were typically used on horseback. Mounted archers dominated other standard armies for centuries.
Even discounting them, longbows are still an outlier in terms of draw strength. Most cultures did not use such heavy bows.
>not using a lightsaber or laser sword that can literally cut through anything with no force
>>316575430
It's actually very similar, most big swords were actually bashing weapons. Just because something is balanced doesn't mean it's not heavy, I don't know where you're getting that idea.
>>316575250
Could anyone use a sword? Yes. Could anyone use a sword WELL? Not at all. Your common peasant will lose to a trained warrior every time. Likewise with literally any other weapon. Guns? Any idiot can pull a trigger. But a trained professional is actually going to hit what they're aiming.
>>316575454
Exactly. That's why you need the balance. A body-builder has focused on strength to the neglect of other things. Just like the cyclist has focused on endurance to the neglect of strength.
Balance wins.
>>316575483
>no force
>Jedi
laughing padawans.gif
>>316574964
>Not using a bow with a draw weight so large it warps the spine and muscles to be able to fire it.
Get fucked France.
>>316575151
Rapiers aren't any lighter than the swords that came before them.
>>316575483
>with no force
>>316575454
I don't think he's saying you can't do it, but that you can't afford to if you want to be an effective fighter
I figure you still need to be able to hit shit even with the strength necessary to fire the bow. That a dexterity feat.
>>316575483
Except lightsabers require force shit for brains. The blade gains weight when it comes into contact with a physical object, such as a human. So if you swing it but don't actually put any force into the slash you'd be lucky to even burn their fucking clothing.
>>316574964
Because you need a certain strength to use the bow, but once you're over the bow maximum load, adding more strength does nothing.
D&D gets it right actually. Bows have a minimum strength rating to fire them without penalty. And you can build a bow with a higher strength rating to take advantage of your strength.
>>316574964
>not using glorious 200000x folded nippon steel
>>316575538
And that's why you field armies of thousands of peasants. A veteran swordsman may be more skilled but not even the best can take down 20 peasants armed with pitchforks. They'll overwhelm him eventually.
And then when guns came into mass production, you made firing lines. They can't all miss.
Fuck training. Big armies win errytime.
>>316575596
I literally don't even know how to respond to this.
>rapiers are not lighter than heavier swords
What do I even say to this, I didn't say anything about "swords that came before them", I didn't say "You're thinking of newer rapiers, not older rapiers."
>>316575538
What does being able to use a sword have to do with strength?
The strength required to swing a sword fast enough isn't high at all and how good you are with a sword doesn't scale with strength in the slightest which is what OP is talking about.
Sure there is a strength requirement, but it's so low it's not worth mentioning.
>>316575708
Large armies are a waste of resources. There's more to war than fighting, if you field an army of peasants your economy will collapse.
don't words weigh like 2-3 pounds?
>>316575708
Until you start killing off droves of said peasants with a hail of arrows and catapults, they all get demoralized and terrified because they've never seen real combat before and haven't been trained to mentally withstand the hells of war and all run home to their families.
DEX is far more important for using a sword. Strength is completely unimportant in comparison. All strength will help you with is wrestling and punching/kicking during a swordfight. It's possible that you can become strong enough to cut off someone's limb with a single hand, but that would require quite a lot of strength. Going 50/50 on dex and str wouldn't give you enough str to do that until level 65 or some shit.
45-60lb is good enough only brits really used longbows, asians prefered mounted archery which was light weight as fuck and wrecked everyone.
Mameluke and Hun, to op pls nerf.
>>316575538
>Your common peasant will lose to a trained warrior every time
You can't trick me m8, I've read A Song of Ice and Fire
Getting good with a sword is just practice
>>316575871
That's why women are just as good at fencing amirite? Strength is speed.
>>316575718
A muscular person has far more thrusting strength and is therefore able to use a sword more effectively given the same skill.
>>316574964
shortbows.
shortbows are about practice and agility not a lot of str.
shortbows were used on horseback and raped everyone in the battlefield for a long time.
Longbows are good for arrow showers, and yes of course they require some muscle.
>>316575712
m80 i'm telling you a rapier doesn't require less strength or more dex
That’s it. I’m sick of all this “Masterwork Crossbow” bullshit that’s going on in the d20 system right now. Longbows deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.
I should know what I’m talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine longbow in England for 2,400,000 Pounds (that’s about $4,000,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even shoot through slabs of solid steel with my arrows.
English bowyers spend years working on a single longbow and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest bows known to mankind.
Longbows are thrice as long as European bow and thrice as strong for that matter too. Anything a shortbow can shoot through, a longbow can shoot through better. I’m pretty sure a longbow could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a single arrow.
Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering England? That’s right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Bowmen and their longbows of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the longbows first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Longbows are simply the best ranged weapon that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for longbows:
(One-Handed Ranged Weapon)
1d12 Damage
19-20 x4 Crit
+2 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
(Two-Handed Ranged Weapon)
2d10 Damage
17-20 x4 Crit
+5 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
Now that seems a lot more representative of the firepower of longbows in real life, don’t you think?
>>316575974
shortbows raped everyone exactly because of the horseback tactics though, not because of the bowman's skill
>>316575975
I'm telling you they do. Pointed swords are literally the only types that require dexterity at all. Everyone who plays video games for some reason thinks sword combat was this sacred art when in reality it came down to who just happened not to die when the flailing started, which generally had very little to do with anyone's individual skill and more to do with how the battle itself was laid out.
at least thanks to based Lars Andersen we now know how bows REALLY were used.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEG-ly9tQGk
>>316575707
>not tying it to a pole to cute down everything especially mounted cavalry
Even women could do it
>>316575718
Because in anything beyond dueling, rapiers are shit weapons for actual combat and the crazy fuckoff Scotsman with a claymore is far more dangerous.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELQqRk0r1yM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip-_vEPotYo
>ugh all this strfags complaining forever, shut the fuck up already strfags
/thread
>>316575950
A peasant doesn't have time to practice with swords. He's too busy farming, paying extortionate taxes, rebuilding his house after it gets burned down by raiders, walking his goods to market and begging adventurers to clear the rats out of his cellar.
Because swords are literally the penis of history. it is the dick measuring contest of history. The better you are with a sword, the better you sword is, the more of a man you are.
It is, quite literally, the penis as a weapon.
Meanwhile the spear and bow were practical weapons utilized for real war and blunt weapons were more practical in close combat like the mace or an axe.
But having a good sword is like having a good penis. It's a societal thing.
Which is why girls can't use swords because they have no penis. Just like girls can't wear a cod piece because penis. Literally penis.
Remember. Penis.
>>316575974
How the fuck niggas in ancient times could fire bows while riding horses? Holy shit.
Spears>swords faggots, fight me
>>316574964
Because no one cares except Archeryfags, and no one likes archery fags
>>316574964
I bet them gay ass archers never got any pussy. Mirrin them mighty brace swordsman
>>316576164
You have to realize that they weren't really shooting at anyone in particular, units were organized into huge masses that you could basically fire into and probably hit someone.
>>316574964
>100-200lbs
bitch the English Longbows that were strong enough to snap an ordinary arrow in 2 and had to use ones the thickness of your thumb and were used very successfully against plate armored frenchies had 120lb draw weight.
What are you smoking
>>316576142
Are you a feminist? To anyone with sense, a sword is a weapon, a tool. To a feminist, it is a phallic symbol.
>comparing arbitrary RPG stats to real life
>>316576170
>faggots, fight me
depends, if you have a spear and i have a sword, i wouldn't fight you because i'd get raped with literally no chance of winning.
>>316576075
Mongol horsemen were immensely talented and trained from a very young age. If it was even remotely easy to use a bow from horseback civilisations that weren't steppe nomads would probably have been doing it too.
>>316576142
>feminists analyze history
>>316576093
>skip ahead
>talking about how medieval archers could shoot with either hand
>demonstrated by throwing two targets in the air and shooting them quickly while changing hands
what? I thought he didn't want to show stupid trick archery
>>316575956
Wrong. Streamlined movements, that is to say using different muscles in the proper sequence to reach a sum greater then its parts, are the source of speed. That's DEX. It doesn't matter how strong you are if you don't know how to use your muscles correctly. A gorilla would be a shitty fencer too.
>>316575971
Yes because you really need all of that strength to puncture plate or some shit, because that's a thing people did.
How good were axes in real life?
If some warrior had a choice between an axe and a sword or whatever else, would he bother with the axe at all?
>>316576075
That and because it's a lethal ranged weapon.
You could have done serious damage with rocks as well but not as accurate or lethal. Shortbows were great and still are against unarmored or light armored opponents (aka 95%+ of the people fighting)
Range has always been OP through life and this physical universe over all.
>>316575483
Fuck off Nepnep, nobody asked you.
>>316576285
You need strength to bash plate and shatter the skull, which is what swords were ACTUALLY for, retard.
>>316576295
Definitely. Swords are only good against unarmored peasants.
Axes are better at penetrating through armor. The head is more heavy and the edge is smaller, letting you concentrate more force on a smaller area.
>>316574964
Well, most bows actually use Dexterity, which is generally considered a stat thats directly tied to your accuracy, and coordinates with things like picking locks and disarming traps.
>>316576056
Is this pasta? Never seen it before.
>>316576056
How long has it been, copypasta?
>>316576114
Who the fuck is talking about Rapier.
Real life is not a videogame, more strength is not going to give you 20% increased damage. You either hit a motherfucker and cut him because you are using a sword and it's sharp or you don't and nothing happens.
And since when is crazy a stat?
>>316576297
>implying an enemy would just stand there and get shot
Oliver, your bow is silly. Go back to the island.
>>316576295
Well axes obviously have significantly more cinetic energy behind them. A sword isn't going to go through armor in a million years.
>>316576295
Axes are a little better against armor if they have a penerating spike like some modified dane axes or if the soldier isn't a good swordsman, swords require more skill and edge alignment, axes are easier but slower because of the balance, the iron is at the top and the rest is wood.
Also axe's sharpness typically lasts more and can be used as a tool to chop wood if you want.
>>316576367
Dexterity = Hand Eye coordination.
>>316575841
>>316575815
You have the knowledge of the whole world at your fingertips but instead you decide to remain ignorant.
>>316576383
They would on an school shuutin with a bow.
not to mention it would look rad af.
>>316576295
axes are pretty good against armor, but only if you have a shield or wear good armor yourself, because they suck at defending
>>316576170
>mfw the phalanx got rekt consistently by romans with their tiny swords
>>316576232
>>316576270
Niggas please. Swords are weak shit that only had a place in sport and as a status symbol. They're practically useless in the majority of combat situations the average soldier faced throughout history.
Even the precious Samurai only used the katana for cutting off a head for the glorious status kick backs and duels.
Spears, bows, maces, and axes are objectively superior weapons as shown by military history.
Swords are more heroic visually but ultimately just a dick measuring tool unless you've got a big ol' zweihander or something with multiple functions.
Put your hate boner for feminists down for one second before a conscripted peasant runs you through with a shitty spear. Your first clue should have been when I said a girl can't do something.
>>316574964
Videogame devs don't do their research and seem to think that the force of a bow comes from the bowstring being made of elastic or something, rather than the potential energy from the bow being bent.
Take any sort of promotional art for a videogame where the character is wielding a bow and you start to realize just how retarded everything is.
For example is pic related. Once Lara lets go of that bowstring, her arrow will go fucking nowhere because it's limp as fuck.
>>316575712
Rapiers are actually pretty heavy. Just because they're thin, it doesn't mean they're featherweight or lighter than a regular long sword. They actually have a very thick, blade, and a heavy pommel to help pop through things.
>>316576395
>Also axe's sharpness typically lasts more and can be used as a tool to chop wood if you want.
Aren't woodcutting axes different from axes that were used as weapons?
>>316576508
Gladius best weapon.
>>316576532
Figure 2. This one is actually kind of fun to try and find just how many things are wrong with it.
>>316574964
because videogame developers have no influences outside of other videogames
>>316576342
>>316576502
>axes are pretty good against armor
Hm better than swords...
But no in fact they suck if they don't have pointy ends and it's just the blade to chop.
>whats half swording
>whats using the pummel of the sword
>etc
If you are looking to bust armor. Maces & warhammers were the weapon.
>>316576101
>cute down everything
>>316576552
I think that's what a hatchet is supposed to be.
>>316576279
>That's DEX.
Nope, STR in D&D covers all things that are physical conditioning, not just "how much you can bench". Which is why you roll strength for both hit and damage.
DEX is hand eye coordination and that sort of things.
>>316576532
yeah sure thing mate because wood totally bends without breaking, right?
god, you people are retarded
>>316576550
A rapier weighs like 2 pounds bro. An actual battle sword can weigh upwards of 7.
This is a fun thread
Not everyone had the money for plated armor right? What would be more common if you weren't a lord but still fought as an occupation (not a peasant with farm tools).
>>316576626
Oh ho ho, you almost got me.
>>316576379
Rapiers are the only sword where strength isn't necessary for them to be useful. Hitting someone with a sword does not mean you will kill him if you don't have power behind that swing. For instance, a straight razor. You could kill yourself very easily with one, but instead you only cut off hair. That's because you don't put enough force behind it to slit your throat.
Now imagine a straight razor that weighs 50 pounds and is as long as your arm. That shit requires strength to do anything than pathetically flop around, looking like a faggot who thinks he knows how to fight from all the anime he's watched. You would die because your weak ass has no business on the battle field and all the heavily armored motherfuckers will laugh at you as they watch you embarrass yourself and your family.
>>316576572
lol the arrow can never go straight.
>>316576093
Lars Anderson does some cool stuff but literally everything he says is made up or bullshit
>>316574964
You're a shitter. Bows come in weight classes. The correct way to size a bow is based on the user's weight (height sort of matters too).
Get a fucking recurve. Delivers more power for lower draw weights. The most anyone would need on a recurve bow is 60lbs, even 45lbs is good enough for most men that weigh about 180lbs.
I'm not saying they don't require STR, or DEX is more important. I'm saying your opening argument is flawed as fuck.
At the place I work we are designing and constructing exoskeletons to be used in dangerous workplaces such as factories. While wearing an exoskeleton you have the strength of 6-7 adult men, so what would happen if I scaled a longbow up to accommodate for the extra lbs of force?
I wonder if I could actually fire a projectile the thickness of a stake with deadly force.
>not being a master of all trades
baka desu senpai
>>316576652
Plated armor was ridiculously expensive and for royal knights and shit only. Chainmail and hardened leather were the most common types of armor I believe, both able to easily deflect a swing from a sword, but not necessarily a strong stab or an arrow.
>>316576652
Probably something padded, didn't it all depend on how much whoever they fought for could afford?
>>316576652
poorfag with chainmail or gamberson, or both if saved some money.
Those are good layers of armor to be honest... Full plate is slow and hot af, would only wear if I felt like my life depended a lot on it, otherwise fuck it I prefer to go light.
>>316576626
This is bait but you know what a recurve bow without a string looks like
>>316576532
You know how it feels for me when I play Borderlands and deal with those shitty sights.
You're either shooting the moon, or digging for potatoes.
Videogame developers (and Hollywood) suck, and always have at weapon/warfare accuracy. They suck at everything else as well, but hey, this is a thread about weapons.
>>316576718
>lol don't being ur mum's pussy into this lol
>>316576591
You mean the sexy sleek warhammers, right? Not the stupid over-sized ones.
>>316576532
Holy shit that string! its like a long piece of gum! Is her bow made of a faggot of twigs? Jesus
>>316574964
Which vidya has one-handed swords as strength dump weapons?
>>316576532
that bow wouldn't bend, the string is way too long
0/10 apply yourself
>>316576724
Replace
>leather
with
>gamberson
it's way more accurate, warm and easy to make en masse.
>>316574964
>why are video games not like real life
Really retard? We need to explain this to you?
If you stub your toe 100 times do you die?
>>316576754
how did medieval people figure out which combinations of wood had the most potential?
>>316576807
didnt they use leather too though?
>>316576718
> You will never be an English yeoman archer in the 100 years war
> You will never watch the greatest Knights in Europe charging towards you screaming for your blood, only for you and your longbow bros to mow them down
>>316576830
Trial and error, literally.
>>316576784
Of course.
Skyrim got it all wrong, everything is twice the size it should be and unpractical af, except maybe the "steel" weapons.
>>316576710
Like a mounted ballistae or something?
I know you're thinking the dragon bow thing from dark souls but this is more like it.
>>316576786
I think it actually is made of twigs because muh survivalist I CAN DO THIS
Here's her using a...mostly normal bow. Again with a rubberband for a string I guess.
>>316576830
they didn't sit around playing video games 16 hours per day
Devs like to screw this shit up because rule of cool takes precedent over realism
What is the best way to hold a bow that is both cool looking and functional?
>>316575871
>No STR
>Blocks one blow
>Sword flies away
>Wrist broken
this is why i always roll a wizard. just need to whip my dick out and shoot fire and energy beams at people while i slam mana pots. none of this fukken thinking that sword and bow nerds have to do.
>>316576384
Axes are a poor mans mace.
Armored opponents are literally 1% of the army really. No body is rich enough to afford full plate cept knights and nobility.
>>316576883
More like a HANDHELD ballistae!
>>316576830
Trial and error, same as everything else in history.
Trial and error just gets a little more dangerous when things explode upon failure.
>>316576889
that one might work, I think the perspective is making it look dodgy
>>316576896
>blocking a blow with a sword instead of your shield
lol
>>316576917
Well yeah not all peasants had the money or the right to carry a sword.
>>316576807
Didn't gambesons have a lice problem or something like that? The stuffing would get damp with sweat and full of all sorts of gnashing little critters.
>>316576697
>50 pound sword
Where the fuck are you getting this retarded information from? Most swords were a few pounds maybe 8-10 at most if we're talking about great swords which we're not because great swords are fucking shit.
Note how I used the word swords and not rapiers because you keep pulling rapiers out of your ass as if I've ever mentioned them.
>>316576841
very rarely, expensive and hard to make, you had to boil the shit, etc, etc.
Gamberson was literally just the work of a tailor with too much mateiral, super easy to make and comfy. It's a super puffy vest.
Actually if you ever got into a bar brawl and you for some reason were wearing gamberson, that puffy shit would take a ton of damage off. Some Skyrim characters wear gamberson, for example the nobles.
>>316576910
The difference is you have to do all your thinking beforehand and cram it into your head, before releasing it like a fountain of jizz
In real life swords were rarely used. They served as status symbols and for ceremonial purposes.
In video games, this isn't true. Probably because it's easier to program sword combat than it is spear.
>>316576957
I think he meant the strong guy blocks the weak guy's sword, which would end similarly. You ever hit anything hard with a stick or metal pipe or something? That shit HURTS. Now imagine doing that with all the force you can muster with a heavy ass sword. You are gonna have a bad time.
>>316576438
>>316575708
please tell me how Cao Cao beat Yuan Shao I mean by you logic Yuan shao should have won because he had a bugger army. Tell me how the mongloian horde too over much of the known world even though by numbers they should have lost. Or the Conquistadors who took over all of south America with less than a 100 of them. Maybe superior numbers don"t mean a thing when you use superior strategies.
>>316576964
Yeah but maces are pretty easy to make.
And axes are basically farming implements.
The truth is most medieval soldiers carried pikes. Which is just a big long stick made out of wood.
>>316576924
Haha yeah imagine how the guy who invented nitroglycerine must've felt. One minute you're mixing chemicals, you look at the tube like "Hm, wonder what this stuff does" so you shake it and BOOM your fucking face gets blown off.
And that's how nitroglycerine was discovered.
>>316576910
Damn right. Can't kill a god with a pointy bit of metal.
How does shooting an arrow even work? Why doesn't the fletching catch on the bow and send the arrow tumbling?
>>316576889
That is less stupid, there is still an over long string but the bow actually seems to be flexing.
>>316577048
Exactly, axes are very accessible as a tool but also effective as a weapon.
>>316577073
literally 15 seconds in google could answer this question for you
hint: arrows bend
>>316577058
The guy who invented/discovered mercury fulminate was a monk who liked to dick around with chemicals in his spare time.
>>316576990
gambersons and aketons + chainmail was the light armor combo trend for a long while, that shit just works super nicely.
http://bashny.net/t/en/276160
>>316577073
because the arrow bends around the bow when you fire it
literally
it's some fucking crazy medieval magic
>>316577073
You enchant the arrows beforehand.
>>316577004
I was exaggerating. I know swords don't actually weigh 50 pounds. I don't know how much they weigh, to be honest, but I know 50 is right out.
And that doesn't change the fact that you need strength to properly wield a sword.
>>316577094
but they're also heavy and don't have much range.
You need a lot of room to swing it without hitting your friends too.
>>316577058
The guys that invent that shit either do so by complete accident or are aiming for it and usually an assistant is the one that blows up.
The guy that invented it knew it was an explosive. Then Nobel decided to make it better and more explosive.
>>316577142
swords are much longer than axes m8
This kind of thread is interesting to make someone realize just how many medieval nerds there are around.
>>316577140
You need in RPG terms a bit of strength to be able to swing a sword and that's it.
Swords are light as fuck because ofcourse they are, why the fuck would we make them heavy?
>>316575275
It's also the first weapon.
>>316577186
you don't need to swing them around for them to be effective
>>316577048
>>316577094
Axes are incredibly effective as weapons, as were most farming tools. A flail was basically a wheat threshing tool that could break an uppity nobleman's neck/smash his skull through his helmet if you hit him hard enough with it.
>>316577218
Because last time I checked E=MC2.
>>316577216
you mean nerds who played mount&blade and watched a couple lindybeige videos on youtube?
yeah I know that's at least half of you faggots
>>316577140
The heaviest swords were 8 pounds, and we're talking claymores.
50 pounds is more like a full set of plate for a 5 foot 8 dude.
>>316577218
to better hit people with them, retard
if you go slice at somebody with a light as fuck sword, you're not exactly going to cut deep.
>>316577186
You can stab people with swords
>>316577264
Well you're wrong there aswell because it's E2=(mc2)2+(pc)2
>>316577035
Hmm no. It's easier to program spear...
there is just one lethal attack... thrust.
unless it's a partisan or other kind of spear that can also cut but it's a little heavier and worse balanced.
also swords are usually super decorated in videogames... you would take a lot of work off the devs if you suggested them to make spears instead.
What the sword has is that it's easier to carry around than a spear. A spear goes in the back, you can't enter an INN with it without crouching too much, a sword is a side-arm, keywords here: SWORDS ARE SIDE-ARMS.
They were the pistols of ancient history, super comfy to carry around everyday.
Thats probably why it was the main weapon of a lot of RPG protagonists. Historical Adventurers irl probably carried swords not weapons of war like spears, unless they were serious af.
Because not every bow is a english longbow fletched from the world tree and strung with the intestines of your enemies, just like every sword is not a japanese katana made from steel folded a thousand times. Archery was a hobby of men and women, but swordsmanship was something only men did.
>>316577332
a spear is better for that
>>316577329
But you are though you fucking retard.
You honestly can't even argue this, swords were light as fuck because as it turns out if you sharpen a piece of steel it cuts.
In BG/BG2 the best bows take like 16+ strength to use. There's one magic bow that needs 19 strength too from memory.
>>316577186
Poleaxes would like a word with you.
>>316577402
How are you gonna get through armor with a light sword?
>>316577374
Spears are too long, m8.
>>316577419
Yeah but that's just straight up a weapon, we're talking wood chopping axes here.
>>316576627
Actually, long swords(the heaviest kind) were usually about 2.4 to 4.0 lbs, you are full of shit, anon, meanwhile, rapiers weighted up to 2.2 lbs.
>>316576552
https://youtu.be/mxrlR7xBXpE - woodcutting axes vs battle axes
>>316576295
https://youtu.be/PN7s1Uh8rhc - axes vs swords
I really like this guy's channel, he always has the answers to all these questions that pop up on /v/.
>>316577073
the fletching isn't rigid. it bends because its made from feathers.
Psh.... you should all consider.... a real weapon.... not that you could wield it...
>>316576131
>extortionate taxes
it was only 10-25% and 10% as tithe. today people in most countries pay close to 70-80% of what they earn if you include indirect taxes and compulsory social security
>>316577402
Yeah but if you use a heavier blade then you can cut even DEEPER THAN 1 CENTIMETER. And not to mention other adverse effects if you manage to hit someone with a heavy weapon, like staggering and fatiguing
>>316577374
Yeah but you can't hack people up with swords.
Swords are like an axe and a spear rolled into one.
>>316577408
>There's one magic bow that needs 19 strength too from memory.
Yep. I usually bought a pair of ogre strength gloves to go along with that bow. Give them both to Minsc. Now he can swing his sword with greater strength when the enemy get too close, and fire powerful arrows with boots on the end at enemies who are far away.
>>316577445
If you want to stab someone in close proximity, it's better to use a short bladed weapon, like a knife, rather than a sword
>>316576508
Phalanx got rekt by Roman artillery and light auxiliary troops with pilum and other trowing weapons.
poleaxe > spear > sword > mace > axe > warhammer
>>316576896
>blocking an strfag when you the faster dexfag can just cut his fingers before hes blade reaches your body
Counter attacking, especially cutting fingers was super common in sword fights.
Hands are probably the easiest target to hit, if you are fast and precise af (a dexfag). Injured hands and the strfag has literally no chance other than to run or try to kick, I recommend running tho since he is unarmed.
Honestly as weaboo as it sounds in weapon fighting speed, precision and skill is what matters the most.
>>316577570
Nice taste, the only thing I would change is putting dual shields on top of everything else.
>>316577073
Archer's paradox m8
Though modern bows compensate for the issue by avoiding it altogether by offsetting the bow at this point.
But yeah you know that jackass video where they shoot dildos and they're all wobbly in the air? Arrows surprisingly wobble through the air like that too. Floppy dildos.
>>316575879
>45-60lb is good enough only brits really used longbows
F-f-fourty five pounds is g-good enough.
You sound like a faggot.
>>316576741
Also, a common misconception is that plate armor was actually heavy and would slow you down, but that's actually untrue.
to quote a museum about medieval armors:
" An entire suit of field armor (that is, armor for battle) usually weighs between 45 and 55 lbs. (20 to 25 kg), with the helmet weighing between 4 and 8 lbs. (2 to 4 kg)—less than the full equipment of a fireman with oxygen gear, or what most modern soldiers have carried into battle since the nineteenth century."
source: metmuseum.org/toah/hd/aams/hd_aams.htm
>>316577494
If you're using a sword that's so heavy it'll stagger people(which by the way is the exact opposite of what you want to do with a sword) you won't get a fucking hit into anyone with functioning legs and no you won't cut 1cm deep with a light sword you'll cut deep enough to fuck a motherfucker up. We know this because the vast majority of swords ever used were light and they fucked shit up when cutting someone.
>>316577443
If your enemy as decent armour you're fucked with a sword to begin with so you might aswell throw at his face and run.
>/v/ talking about medieval warfare
Cringe thread in disguise?
>>316574964
The only bows with those kinds of poundages were mongolian and english ones. And those bows won their users continents. That's hardly representative of the majority of bows. Native American Flatbows and Japanese Yumis for example had really low poundages and were mostly for hunting.
>>316577570
Historically accurate
>>316577570
Give some context please.
In you are talking about 1v1 open field fight, super light armored or unarmored it's:
spear > poleaxe > sword > axe > mace > warhammer
From lightest and fastest weapon to slowest.
Spear is usually 2 handed and is a stick with a pointy end so it's the fastest also god-tier reach, Poleaxe is heavier but it has the god-tier reach advantage.
And so on.
>>316576702
the arrow cant go anywhere, because the left hand blocks the string from being drawn.
You guys know that we can talk about this stuff all day on >>>/his/ ,right?this is still fun though
>>316577570
Nice.
I fucking love polearms.
>>316577482
That bitch got trolled so hard by /b/ back in the day, that she tried to turn it against them by being as "4chan" as possible and thinking she was an "EPIC TROLL LOL" as well.
>>316577490
I was probably thinking those times of war or other hardship when you get a bad lord who goes around and takes everything from his farmers, leaving them only the barest essentials to survive the winter.
>>316577745
not to mention that bow would probably snap off at the tips
Then again that string is just magically attached to either end so who knows?
>>316577468
Love Skall. Hes wife seems like a SJW through I don't trust her a lot...
>>316577781
we can talk about porn all day on /gif/, /v/ is still a better place to discuss it
>>316577494
making it even heavier won't help it absorb force any better and cutting force is improved just by changing the angles.
>>316577693
Look, if want to cut real good, you want a heavy enough weapon that doesn't let you over-exert yourself, let gravity do the work for you. Swinging a light sword is good and all, but against armor it's basically next to useless, at least with a heavy sword you can clobber fuckers to death.
>>316577516
except without the reach of a spear or the cost effectiveness of either
>>316577781
Technically it belongs on /k/, not /his/.
>>316577875
I don't remember her voicing her opinion about anything, but she does seem like one. But she also seems pretty chill.
>>316577917
Define heavy sword.
>>316575707
I was under the impression katanas were shorter than that.
>>316577942
Medieval weapons can be discussed on /his/, it's a nice way to filter out firearms and all that boring recent shit.
Question: Assuming the reflex on the bow comes from springs, would Serah's sword bow thing actually work
>>316577045
>Or the Conquistadors who took over all of south America with less than a 100 of them.
Mostly because they brought smallpow and other fucking nasty disease that killed around, according to most recent estimation, around 90 or 95% of meso- and south american fighting forces. Also, more came, they didn't do everything with 100 folks.
>>316577917
>but against armor
just use a mace.
>>316577663
Didn't the French get absolutely fucked by British Longbowmen when they sent a bunch of fully armored Knights at them on foot? The Longbows couldn't pierce the armour, but the Knights were so fucking exhausted after running the entire range of the Longbows while getting pelted that they couldn't fight.
>>316577781
How the fuck did I miss this coming into existence?!
We've waited so long for a history board.
>>316577917
>"Look, I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about, but I'm gonna argue hypotheticals with you for hours until you relent."
You should both just save yourselves a lot of hassle and just post the smug girls at each other right now.
>>316575592
Mah Yeoman.
>>316577538
swords are a better all round weapon
>>316578023
There's a notification thing up there, there are other new boards like >>>/aco/ and the fucking useless piece of shit that is >>>/trash/
>>316576532
It's less devs and more the artists sucking. I don't think I've ever seen bow art that actually looks good.
>>316578010
Whatever you say, Anon. I'm not getting in an argument with you over this stupid shit.
>>316577660
And you sound like you don't know what the fuck a recurve bow is.
>>316577917
Are you fucking retarded, deluded or underage?
Why the fuck would I want to slice someone on plate armor with a fucking sword? People invented maces for that, war axes or even polearms, there were no use for the claymore in practical combat, nor in wars, not even in duels, you retard, even daggers had more killing potential close-quarters than any kind of sword, because you could grab the fucker and slice right into his joints.
Here's a demonstration for you, friend.
youtu.be/O9eCzG8AAoQ?t=7m36s
Also, there were no "heavy" weapons, even that shitty sword weighted about 2 to 3 kilos
>>316575454
Body building has absolutely nothing to do with athleticism, unless you're mixing in standard aerobic exercises like swimming and long distance running, your muscles are going to be literally useless for anything other than picking things up and putting them down. Why do you think actual athletes look nothing like bodybuilders, except for those who lift weights as a sport?
>>316578008
Because they are.
That's a nodachi.
>>316575562
It can't be that hard to have the legs of a cyclist and the arms of a body builder.
>>316575454
i like how you say "that's not entirely true" and then proceed to completely agree with them
you're a real genius now kid
>>316578225
>this weakfag can't get through armor, therefore it's impossible!
What's the best weapon for a little girl?
>>316578384
nudity
>>316578225
>there were no use for the claymore in practical combat, nor in wars, not even in duels
Zweihänder were used by Doppelsöldner to break up pike formations.
>>316578021
I didn't know about that specific historical event, can you please link that, anon? I would like to read about it more.
But I don't think knights fully-plated would actually get tired after climbing some stairs after the siege started, on actual field battles that's a possibility, though, and the weather would influence the battle too, since a hot fucking weather would melt the poor dudes wearing the armor.
>>316578415
Why would a little girl have nudity as her weapon?
>>316576845
>You will never go around sacking France with Edward III and Chaucer
>>316577364
>spear
>just one attack
wew check out this historian
>>316574964
Because nerds don't know this.
they also don't know that a skilled archer can fire a bow from the hip, several arrows per second, while running.
Every once in a while, despite the neverending stream of threads about MGS, undertale, life is strange, super smash bros, fallout 4, and indivisible, a thread like this pops up and out come all the incognito fa/tg/uys.
It warms my heart to know that there are pockets offunhidden in the ocean of piss on this board
>>316578474
it would disarm all of her opponents
>>316576532
That bow is beyond retarded. You don't even need to know shit about bows to know that will never work.
>tfw you will never be a horse archer
>>316578447
I don't remember much about it, if i remember correctly it was during the 100 year war.
>>316576253
With a regular sword an nothing else maybe but there are many cases of swordmen with shields rushing in and destroying spear unit, also guys with big sword and harbediers were considered anti spear guys.
>>316578598
Horseback archery is a meme and there is no historical evidence that it was used in war.
>>316578384
Friendship.
>>316576056
>American soldiers targeted the men with the longbows
o i am laffin
>>316578598
ever try to shoot a moving target? ever try to shoot a moving target while you are moving at a gallop? yeah, they were terrible and barely hit anything. Thats why you do not hear much about horse archers in history. The greatest weapon ever was the flail or spear. both are hands down the best weapons.
>>316578419
If we are talking about the 14th century, yeah, sure, but the Zweihänder had largely ceased to have a practical application, being mostly used in ceremonial events. I was referring about the scottish greatsword in my post, not specifically the Zweihänder. Sorry about the misconception.
>>316578312
>weakfag
You can't even wield something about 2 to 3 kilos? Are you that fucking dyel, you retard?
>>316578447
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cr%C3%A9cy
There's a short comic about it, it's pretty damn good
>>316577663
>" An entire suit of field armor (that is, armor for battle) usually weighs between 45 and 55 lbs. (20 to 25 kg), with the helmet weighing between 4 and 8 lbs. (2 to 4 kg)—less than the full equipment of a fireman with oxygen gear, or what most modern soldiers have carried into battle since the nineteenth century."
With the added benefit that a full set of plate armor is evenly distributed over your whole body.
>>316577179
Nobel made it safer. Having explosives that dont blow up just by moving it around was a pretty great accomplishment.
>>316576056
>World War II
Actually this raises a very good question. Why didn't we use longbows in the first world war? Guns were still shit and the artillery wasn't doing very well. But longbows would have been precise enough to fire into the air and have arrow fall right inside the german trenches.
