Got a Real-World Weapon or Armor Question? Mk. IX

[Anderlith]

Thank you very much, now I have another question, & feel free to ignore if you think that this derails the thread. What you you assume the damage of a nagimaka is? 1d10 /18-20x3? 2d6 /19-20? I kind of think it could work as an exotic two handed bastard sword with better crits (longer shaft makes for more damage once it's in you) with the brace ability.

[Matthew]

We cannot discuss game statistics in this thread, but feel free to start a new thread to deal with such questions.

[Anderlith]

We cannot discuss game statistics in this thread, but feel free to start a new thread to deal with such questions.

Okay then, thanks for your help

[Thiel]

Well he also claims that sailors of that period didn't wear shoes for that very reason prefering to tar their bare feet and I don't recall any reference to sailors wearing gloves. I certainly remember references to sailors using rope as belts and even wearing rope sandals.

The reason sailors didn't wear shoes weren't rot, but safety and cost. Leather shoes were expensive and provided little in way of grip. Rope sandals on the other hand were usually free, since they måde them themself drøm scrap rope and old canvas. Still, many prefered bare feet since they couldn't fall off when they climbed in the rigging.

A hanger is a variation of the cutlass.

[fusilier]

I'm currently reading a novel set in the late 18th century about a midshipman in the british navy. It describes the sword he carries as a 'hanger' a term I've never heard before. I wonder what the weapon was like.
Also a friend claims the weapon was called this because it was carried without a scabbard on the belt as leather scabbards would rot awayat sea. Is this true ?

Hanger is a generic term for a sword that "hangs" at your side. During the period you describe, it's a fairly short sword with a curved blade -- kind of like a cutlass, but not so heavy.

As for leather at sea, I don't know exactly what sea water would due to leather, but it's probably not that deleterious. Leather typically needs to be cared for (with oils) anyway. Living in a dry climate, my leather gear often feels better if I spend some time in a humid one (although I haven't been to the shore with it).

[fusilier]

The reason sailors didn't wear shoes weren't rot, but safety and cost. Leather shoes were expensive and provided little in way of grip. Rope sandals on the other hand were usually free, since they måde them themself drøm scrap rope and old canvas. Still, many prefered bare feet since they couldn't fall off when they climbed in the rigging.

A hanger is a variation of the cutlass.

Agreed. Leather soles have precious little grip -- and hobnails and heelplates would be bad on the deck of a ship, you would actually get even less grip!

As for "wax" -- wax is still used on leather shoes and boots, it helps water proof them.

[Thiel]

As for leather at sea, I don't know exactly what sea water would due to leather, but it's probably not that deleterious. Leather typically needs to be cared for (with oils) anyway. Living in a dry climate, my leather gear often feels better if I spend some time in a humid one (although I haven't been to the shore with it).

Leather was and is used everywhere on wooden sailing ships for a myriad of different purposes, from flash protection in the magazine to chafing gear in the rigging.

Saltwater will damage leather, but not more so than it damage wood or iron.

[Xuc Xac]

I would like to ask a question. Is there any such weapon that has a blade like a sword but has a three foot or longer shaft? Particularly a double edged blade.

In addition to the Chinese and Japanese swords that Endoperez mentioned, you might also find the African Assegai fits that description (especially the Zulu iklwa, which had a blade about 18 inches long and a two to three foot long shaft).

[Yora]

Most examples I know off are single edged curved blades.

Nagamaki are similar to katana, but with a handle as long as the blade.

A falx is similar, but has the blade bent inward like a sickle, and I wouldn't exactly call it a sword.

I don't think assegai fits. It's really just a short spear.

[Thiel]

I've seen examples of what I believe are boarding pikes that matches that description.
1,5m shaft and about 60cm sword-like blade.

[Spiryt]

There is this stuff/staff, mainly Swedish/Scandinavian in origin it seems.

Might have indeed been part of the broken sword hafted like that, or solid cut/thrust blade mounted on long haft, so may somewhat fit to the description...

[Thiel]

The proportions were different, but that's essentially what I saw.

[Fhaolan]

There is this stuff/staff, mainly Swedish/Scandinavian in origin it seems.

Might have indeed been part of the broken sword hafted like that, or solid cut/thrust blade mounted on long haft, so may somewhat fit to the description...

Some people are in the habit of calling that a glaive, or 'short glaive'. This may be wrong, but I've seen the terms used like that in a couple of places. That's the fun of weapon terminology, there's little to no consistency. :)

[Partysan]

Short and totally different question: If a martial artist/pugilist would wrap his hands in medieval times, what kind of wraps would he use? I mean form, material etc... I guess it might be different considering where the person comes from, but would be a type of wrap that suits the purpose and is accessible in those times?

[Spiryt]

Some people are in the habit of calling that a glaive, or 'short glaive'. This may be wrong, but I've seen the terms used like that in a couple of places. That's the fun of weapon terminology, there's little to no consistency. :)

This is not really very short though, compared to glaive....

And AFAIR, european glaive generally have one edge, with some kind of rib portruding from the haft and/or doesn't generally taper to a uniform point.

But yeah, no consistency is a fact, and as far as use of this thing goes, glaive probably can easily work.

Short and totally different question: If a martial artist/pugilist would wrap his hands in medieval times, what kind of wraps would he use? I mean form, material etc... I guess it might be different considering where the person comes from, but would be a type of wrap that suits the purpose and is accessible in those times?

That can be pretty difficult, beacuse as far as I am aware, no real striking arts were preserved, at least from Europe, if we're talking about medieval.

There's plenty of wrestling, locks, and whatever, both with arms and armor, and bare hands, but nothing really concerning intense punching other dudes.

There are images of Greek pankrationists having their wrists and hands wrapped, but it's antiquity, and it's hard to guess what could it have been. Maybe there are some written sources about it.

[Yora]

The word "glaive" is a particularly bad offender here. Or the word had been raped the worst by people who have no idea what the word means. Effect is the same.

[Matthew]

Interestingly, and I know I have mentioned this before, glaive was used in medieval French poetry for sword, as well as being a medieval French word for spear.

[Yora]

And here I was thinking that a sword is the only kind of bladed weapon that would never be called a glaive. Silly me.

[GungHo]

Short and totally different question: If a martial artist/pugilist would wrap his hands in medieval times, what kind of wraps would he use? I mean form, material etc... I guess it might be different considering where the person comes from, but would be a type of wrap that suits the purpose and is accessible in those times?

Forms are difficult, because a lot of unarmed combat methods weren't preserved the same way they were preserved in Asia. You'd see punching, kicking, and wrestling, but it's not like they did it to teach you a primary method of self defense or were trying to hide something subversive.

That being said, the Minoans used cloth wrappings. Ancient Grecian handwraps were originally cloth wrappings with leather cords as a knuckle-duster. Romans went and created the caestus by adding crazy spikes and blades to the Grecian wrap because they were crazy. But, they got rid of the caestus in 50 BC, and the banned boxing altogether in 393 AD.

People still punched each other hard in the face, but it wasn't really organized anywhere in the West except for maybe in Russia, where it was bareknuckle. The British brought prizefighting back in the 16~17th century and it was all bareknuckle at that point. They didn't start using gloves until Broughton's rules became popular.

TLDR; I wouldn't give them any gloves/wraps at all if you're modeling it after the European middle ages.

I'm not even sure if you would for Asia, either. The Thais/Cambodians were using handwraps with hemp rope in the 1800s, and one assumes this was developed gradually, but the stories about using the wraps with ground glass and plaster of paris and all that are apocryphal at best.

[Spiryt]

The word "glaive" is a particularly bad offender here. Or the word had been raped the worst by people who have no idea what the word means. Effect is the same.

Dunno, I generally have seen it as underused if anything.... Like pretty wide scale of naginatas going as being similar to "halberds" (WTF?).

Only offense I can think of is Blizzard guys that from whatever reason concluded that glaive is something that you throw.

Interestingly, and I know I have mentioned this before, glaive was used in medieval French poetry for sword, as well as being a medieval French word for spear.

George Silver, in any case, is "already" mentioning 'glaves' as polearms at the end of 16th century.

Etymology was probably quite simple, but hard to track....

[GungHo]

Only offense I can think of is Blizzard guys that from whatever reason concluded that glaive is something that you throw.

They watched Krull. Which stared Kenneth "Lt. Eddington When He Had Hair" Marshall, Robbie "The Lost Mario Brother" Coltrane, Freddie "That's Not Michael Caine" Jones, and Liam "That's Not Liam Neeson" Neeson.

[gkathellar]

Short and totally different question: If a martial artist/pugilist would wrap his hands in medieval times, what kind of wraps would he use? I mean form, material etc... I guess it might be different considering where the person comes from, but would be a type of wrap that suits the purpose and is accessible in those times?

Thai martial artists have been known to use rope, and I would be surprised if the modern cloth wrapping hasn't been around for ages and ages. I'm not sure this would have been ubiquitous, though.

The primary use of wrapping the hands and wrists is to keep the wrist safe from injury due to bending or otherwise going out of alignment on impact. It does also protect the bones in the hands, but to a lesser extent. You can learn to keep the wrists straight and condition the hands, though — a common feature of East Asian martial arts, and one I'm sure has its European parallels.

[Spiryt]

. You can learn to keep the wrists straight and condition the hands, though — a common feature of East Asian martial arts, and one I'm sure has its European parallels.

Obviously, but even for the best strikers out there there will be injuries, not matter how conditioned are your hands.

As far as East Asian MA arts goes, I'm pretty sure that most of them that are competitive and at least semi contact, use wrapping and gloves in training and fighting as well - Muay Thai, Sanshou for example.

[Fhaolan]

And here I was thinking that a sword is the only kind of bladed weapon that would never be called a glaive. Silly me.

Heeheee. Just to add to the fun *modern* French has 'glaive' being the term for the Roman gladius.

[Spiryt]

Now, there's no choice but to combine this:

Spoiler

Show

with this:

Spoiler

Show

Today photoshop, tomorrow, Hollywood.

Bonus points for him throwing it, Krull style, then.

[Eldan]

Does anyone have any good data on how big and heavy siege engines typically were? Specifically, Trebuchets and Catapults.

Now, I know that there's of course a variety of sizes, but is there any thing "typical" for, roughly, the late middle ages? Weight would be especially important. You can find size data, normally, but I've never seen weight.

[Yora]

The cool thing about trebuchets is, that they apparently work at any scale. You can make them as small or as big as you want and it works, so I would assume that they were used in a lot of different sizes. I guess the only limit would be how much stress the wood of the frame can handle, and how large boulders you could get to load it with.

On that topic, I like this video. No idea about historic accuracy, but a good example of what these guys try to aim the trebuchet.

[gkathellar]

Someone accidentally bumped Thread 8 with a question yesterday, and I just want to move it over here so that it can actually get answered. (Personally, I've got nothing for it.)

In terms of historical accuracy, what are some of the better viking movies?

[Galloglaich]

I like Kurt Douglas 1958 "The Vikings", it's at least in the ball park and holds up surprisingly well in spite of some odd casting decisions (Tony Curtius as a Saxon / Viking hahah)

More modern Vikings films are more flawed, but in some cases have some good realistic features.

My favorite is a somewhat low budget and not perfect but (in my opinion) pretty realistic "Beowulf and Grendel" of 2005

http://vikingsofbjornstad.gbtllc.com...ulfGrendel2005

This is NOT to be confused with the much more Hollywood and ridiculous (though still watchable Beowulf of 2007 with Angelina Jolie in it and the extremely strange version of Grendel with voice by the perrenially odd Crispin Glover)

Then there is the pretty realistic if dark Finnish movie Ofelas ("Pathfinder) of 1987

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093668/

Not to be confused with the crappy 2007 American remake

There is Severed Ways, a low-budget Viking film about two Norse explorers left behind in North America

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1062965/

It has at least one very gross out moment and is kind of silly in certain respects but is not a bad film, far better for example than the more recent similarly themed Valhalla Rising which was really aimless and terrible IMO (in spite of having Mads Mikkelsen in it who is a natural to be cast in any Viking film)

And there is this slightly bigger-budget Polish film Stara Basn

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0380726/

which is a visually very nice but flawed depiction of an old and popular story in Poland and as such was a disappointment to a lot of Poles but I think would be popular among most Americans with an interest in Vikings or Fantasy RPG type genres. It depicts Slavs and Vikings in conflict in an interesting way. The guys playing the Vikings are mostly Eastern European re-enactors with reasonably good kit (very good by Hollywood standards). If you can find it with English subtitles or dub I recommend it.


Here is a more complete list with short reviews

http://vikingsofbjornstad.gbtllc.com/VikingMovies.htm

G.

[Matthew]

I would go along with that. Also, not to be confused with Beowulf and Grendel is Grendel, another truly awful film, not even salvaged for Star Trek fans by the presence of Marina Sirtis.