How do you draw a Greatsword?

[Gavinfoxx]

If that was the case, wouldn't they rust in wet weather?

Which is why you keep them in oilcloths and such?? Or keep them in a cart until needed??

[Spiryt]

Scottish claymore wielders during the William Wallace era might not have had the squires available to lift the sword out for them.

Any authentic claymores with sheaths from that era?

There were no claymores during WW era.

Anyway, most of really large sword weren't sheathed at all, just carried around like polearms and other 'large' weapons.

Spoiler

Show

[Larkas]

If I'd be dm I'd allow the sheats but it would take longer to unsheath the sword than just a movement action.

And this is where sacrificing realism for balance is a good thing. Melee types are already penalized as is, they don't need one more thing to worry about.

I dunno about weapons and fighting, but when splitting logs, I'll rather have an lighter axe with a good edge than a really heavy blunt one, since you have to swing that thing.

Oh, but you don't need the sword to cut. A crack in your skull might kill you just as much as a cut through your abdomen.

[hamishspence]

Would they have been able to carry them around in carts back then? I can't see them doing that at the height of the Scottish Wars of Independence.

There were no claymores during WW era.

There would have been big longswords though- "proto-claymores" so to speak.

[Greenish]

Oh, but you don't need the sword to cut. A crack in your skull might kill you just as much as a cut through your abdomen.

So why are you using a sword, and not a hammer?

[Gavinfoxx]

Would they have been able to carry them around in carts back then? I can't see them doing that at the height of the Scottish Wars of Independence.

Well, they didn't use the full sized two handed swords like in that picture then... I believe those wars were Medieval, not Renaissance, when you got the BIGGEST swords... but they still probably would have carried them over the shoulder, most likely.

[Spiryt]

Would they have been able to carry them around in carts back then? I can't see them doing that at the height of the Scottish Wars of Independence.

Most scottish combatants wouldn't have swords of any kind, anyone with a sword, especially longsword, would be probably a knight or generally someone with a horse. So transport wouldn't be all that hard.

Those swords would be sheathed easily anyway.

As far as "heavy swords with no edge that crush" it's old and silly myth, and utter nonsense too.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/2HGS.html

Pretty solid article.

[Tvtyrant]

Peasants wouldn't use swords. Swords suck. It takes years to master the nuances of swordplay and the inevitable grappling involved with it. It takes a few months to learn a pike, and about 20 seconds for a spear or crossbow. Might as well arm them with shot puts as swords....

[Larkas]

So why are you using a sword, and not a hammer?

Lift each of them and tell me which is lighter

As far as "heavy swords with no edge that crush" it's old and silly myth, and utter nonsense too.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/2HGS.html

Pretty solid article.

Oh, I've read that before. Still, the point remains: the greatest threat from those weapons came from their weight, not their edge. Even with a blunt edge, they would be deadly. Hence, a keen edge wasn't as important for them than, say, for a longsword. I don't think I said they had no edge though, as much as little edge. If I did, I'm sorry, and I stand corrected.

[Gavinfoxx]

...It also takes a few months to learn the basics of a Sword, just like a Pike. They ARE expensive though. But you can learn to fight with any melee weapon in 'a few months'...

And if you are talking about real swords, don't use the D&D term Longsword without specifying. In real life Longsword also refers to two handers... If you want to refer to a 1 hander, use the term Arming Sword.

[Derjuin]

Luckily enough I don't think a D&D Greatsword isn't quite as large as a Zweihander.

Interestingly, if you compare the weights, a D&D Greatsword weighs around as much as the heavier non-ceremonial Zweihanders (8 lbs vs. 3-ish kg), whereas a "real" greatsword is probably closer to a D&D Bastard Sword.

I would assume that a greatsword/zweihander would be carried over the shoulder, in some kind of release-mechanism sheath (like a ring or loop of leather), or by a squire. In D&D, I would imagine some kind of contraption would be in play, since the game tends not to be very true-to-history.

[Siltharon]

Most scottish combatants wouldn't have swords of any kind, anyone with a sword, especially longsword, would be probably a knight or generally someone with a horse. So transport wouldn't be all that hard.

Those swords would be sheathed easily anyway.

As far as "heavy swords with no edge that crush" it's old and silly myth, and utter nonsense too.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/2HGS.html

Pretty solid article.

thank you for for this! finally someone posted it

Usually heavy swords had an edge on the upperpart of the sword to slice and pierce while the lower part had no edge so the knight could grip the blade and use the whole weapon kinda like a spear depending on the situation.
The most developed Zweihanders were thought through from the hilt to the tip and could be used for several different things. As bludgeoning, pirecing and slashing weapons and apparently also as aspears.
They actually were one of the most developted weapons of warfare till blackpowder weapons came and made armor obsolet.

We are talking about fantasy though and since the person using a Greatsword probably wants to use it for cutting through rows of enemies (and that is absolutely possible in DnD thanks to the great strengt ) you shouldn't take it all to seriously.
Have to agree with Larkas here.
If you want to stay realistic .... don't use sheaths or use the sheaths mentioned before if they absolutely want to carry them on their backs but let it take them longer to actually pull them out (like a standartaction or even a fullroundaction)

[Greenish]

Lift each of them and tell me which is lighter

The hammer, probably. With most of the weight in the head, it doesn't need to be very heavy. Can't be very heavy, in fact, if you have to swing it around repeatedly.

[Dienekes]

Would they have been able to carry them around in carts back then? I can't see them doing that at the height of the Scottish Wars of Independence.


There would have been big longswords though- "proto-claymores" so to speak.

I honestly can't think of anything larger than a one-handed sword at the time of the Scottish Wars, but I'll admit my knowledge of the weaponry of the time is limited. (Well the normal longsword but I don't think that's nearly long enough, and I'm not sure if it was used by the Scottish)

And yes, they would carry them in a wagon, along with polearms, and other equipment too big to carry.

[Scow2]

You can't carry them over the shoulder in D&D (Well, you can, but then it's always "Drawn") - You need SOMETHING to hook them on. I always imagined they used hooks or half-sheaths instead of actual sheaths, though.

They lack historical precedent, but they're not unrealistic - A 2-handed fighter needs something that he can store his sword on when he's not actively using it. Whether it needs to be protected from the elements or not depends on the sword's material and enchantment.

[Umbranar]

Scots had claymores on their backs. This was done by some sort of leather harness with atleat one ring, which was at the top. Basicly they would lean forward a bit and pull it free over their shoulder. Yes it slow but the sheer striking power of the claymore was worth it. Just watch braveheart, I think it has a scene with that.

And basicly what Dienekes said. Wagons.

[hamishspence]

Braveheart diverges from history in a great many areas- it's possible that this includes weaponry as well.

[Dienekes]

Scots had claymores on their backs. This was done by some sort of leather harness with atleat one ring, which was at the top. Basicly they would lean forward a bit and pull it free over their shoulder. Yes it slow but the sheer striking power of the claymore was worth it. Just watch braveheart, I think it has a scene with that.

And basicly what Dienekes said. Wagons.

I wouldn't use Braveheart as a historical source, for anything, ever. Don't get me wrong I enjoy the movie but it took more than a few liberties with history. And on that note, outside of film I have never seen any evidence that swords were worn on peoples back for anything except maybe when tied up in packs for a long march.

There was also a scabbard that was attached to the saddle of a horse, but again this was mostly for swords smaller than a D&D greatsword, because for obvious reasons those weren't used on horseback.

Braveheart diverges from history in a great many areas- it's possible that this includes weaponry as well.

It's not just possible, they did.

[Greenish]

Braveheart diverges from history in a great many areas- it's possible that this includes weaponry as well.

I wouldn't use Braveheart as a historical source, for anything, ever.

I guess he didn't mean Braveheart as a historical source, but as an example of how you'd draw a greatsword.

[Dr.Epic]

This isn't as much of a rules question as it is a general question. I was thinking about the other day when trying to determine how a character was carrying her (adamantine) Greatsword. The rules state that you can draw your weapon as a move action. But with a Greatsword how does this actually work? In many artworks people carry them on their backs, but there is no way your arms are long enough to draw such a large sword from a sheathe at your back. So how do you carry it? And how do you bring it out to fighting shape within a move action?

Look at the sheath Guts has from Berserk.

[Spiryt]

Braveheart diverges from history in a great many areas- it's possible that this includes weaponry as well.

There's like one plausible helmet in whole Braveheart, it definitely and completely diverges from history - from actual events to clothes.

They lack historical precedent, but they're not unrealistic - A 2-handed fighter needs something that he can store his sword on when he's not actively using it. Whether it needs to be protected from the elements or not depends on the sword's material and enchantment.

It can be simply covered with something, or even be in proper sheath - just this sheath's point will be only storing and protection, sword will be anyway carried like a polearm, because this is mostly what it is, practically - not really everyday weapon.

[Larkas]

The hammer, probably. With most of the weight in the head, it doesn't need to be very heavy. Can't be very heavy, in fact, if you have to swing it around repeatedly.

I'm the first to admit that I'm not a physics specialist, but it seems to me that you need a heavy hammer to do the same damage as a much lighter blade. I could possibly inflict a similar wound (damage-wise) using a kitchen knife and a regular toolbox hammer, and the latter is much heavier than the former. It must have something to do with leverage and torque. The unwieldness of large hammers and axes were, IIRC, modeled in previous versions of the game, being much slower than greatswords, for example.

[Spiryt]

I'm the first to admit that I'm not a physics specialist, but it seems to me that you need a heavy hammer to do the same damage as a much lighter blade. I could possibly inflict a similar wound (damage-wise) using a kitchen knife and a regular toolbox hammer, and the latter is much heavier than the former. It must have something to do with leverage and torque. The unwieldness of large hammers and axes were, IIRC, modeled in previous versions of the game, being much slower than greatswords, for example.

Uh, hammer and blade do 'damage' on completely different principless, so comparing them is not exactly feasible.

Generally, swords and hammers and other percussive weapons were of very similar weight range. Some were heavier, some lighter, like always.

http://users.wpi.edu/~virtualarmory/...l?anum=2005.01

[Larkas]

Uh, hammer and blade do 'damage' on completely different principless, so comparing them is not exactly feasible.

Generally, swords and hammers and other percussive weapons were of very similar weight range. Some were heavier, some lighter, like always.

http://users.wpi.edu/~virtualarmory/...l?anum=2005.01

I stand corrected then. In my defense, though, I know the damage is completely different, but they are all reduced to damage die in D&D

[Ashtagon]

imc, greatswords and polearms "sheathed" on the back are actually held in a baldric. A baldric is a belt that goes across the shoulder designed to support the weight of exactly this kind of item. Modern use of baldrics is primarily limited to bannermen in marching bands.

[Norin]

Now, let me tell you how you draw a greatsword!

Spoiler

Show

Rawr!

[hamishspence]

imc, greatswords and polearms "sheathed" on the back are actually held in a baldric. A baldric is a belt that goes across the shoulder designed to support the weight of exactly this kind of item. Modern use of baldrics is primarily limited to bannermen in marching bands.

Any pictures of one with sword in? And how would it have been drawn?

[Greenish]

Those weapons killed people due to their sheer weight, they didn't need to have a real edge

I'm the first to admit that I'm not a physics specialist, but it seems to me that you need a heavy hammer to do the same damage as a much lighter blade.

Which is it? Do they have an edge or not?

[Onerai]

As has been said a few times now, I expect historical heavy two-handed swords (which is what the greatsword represents) would've been carried over the shoulder or by a squire/porter/hireling of some description. The point about maintenance is certainly valid though; to keep it safe from the elements it probably would have been sheathed, though the sheath would likely not have been integrally attached to the warrior's clothing.

I would assume that "drawing a greatsword as a move action" would involve seizing the sword's hilt in one hand and pulling the sheath off it with the other. If the sword were to be attached to clothing (say for riding, as pointed out above), I imagine this would involve some sort of strap/hook holding the sheath, but one from which the sheath could be quickly released. Thus in either event the bulk of the work is in pulling the sheath off the sword, rather than trying to pull the sword out of a worn solid sheath (which as stated can't really be done).

[eviljav]

It's a really low "Profession:Artist" check. Maybe 5? Would also allow someone untrained to try for a general one.