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

[Brother Oni]

I think we are applying a much to modern spin on it when trying to think how a left handed person works in the shield-wall. I strongly suspect they were simply considered clumsy people as they were taught to use their right hand.

While I concede the modern, it's less think and more practical experience. With one handed weapons and a round or kite shield, there's no real effect of handedness - I think Jay R has more experience than me on this.

For example, spot the leftie:

Spoiler: Shield wall

Show

He's on the right flank for some reason.

Note that my comments are for round and kite shields which are fairly flat and overlap well. Something more curved like a scutum or aspis may well have issues with different handers (I have no experience using these) and some more digging indicates that all polearm use was right handed.

How far back does the idea of a dominant hand go, and actually allowing a deviation from the norm, anyone know?
How does eg fencing manuals take account of this? Do they? Is there other literary examples of left handed fighters?

I've found a 15th century reference to different handed fencers: link.

Note: This tenet is addressed to left-handers and right-handers. If you are a right-handed fencer and you are closing to an opponent and you think you can hit him, do not strike the first blow from the (your) left side. Because you are weak there and you cannot resist, if he binds strongly against your blade. Because of this, strike from the right side, you can work strongly "Am Schwert" ("on the sword") and you can use all techniques you like. So, if you are left-handed, do not strike from the right side, since left-handers are usually not used to strike effectively from the right side and vice versa.

I've also found an account by a Chinese left handed archer, but I can't date it.

I'm not so sure distaste of left-handedness went so deep as that.

Aside from the religious aspect, I mentioned WW1 left handed mortar crews earlier.

During WW1, soldiers often developed a 'live and let live' attitude towards their opposite number. If we didn't shell or attack the Germans while they were having breakfast at 07:00, then they were less likely to do the same to us when we had ours at 07:30.

Mortars were in short supply, so the crews went up and down the front, attacking as and when ordered. They often weren't aware of these niceties so they generally attacked during these informal truces then decamped and moved on, leaving the soldiers holding that stretch of trench to suffer the retaliation by angry Germans.

This lead to the general distrust of mortar teams and their predominantly left handed crew.

[Stuebi]

Okay, quick question for a Samurai Character I want to play in The Dark Eye.

As far as I know Samurai usually had a Katana as a main and a Wakizashi as a second weapon (And maybe a Tanto, but im not sure). Now, one of my buddies knows a lot about weapons from the past, and he told me that Katanas tend to be overhyped by most systems, and a lot of people. A weapon mainly meant for cutting (Which I know), but cant deal with any form of heavier armor (which I didnt know).

Is this true? So wielding said gear would leave you utterly helpess in the face of someone wearing any form of Plate- and/ or Chainmail?

And, if that's the case, I'd be extra grateful for alternatives in terms of Equipment, who still somewhat keep in theme with a Japanese Warrior.

[snowblizz]

Okay, quick question for a Samurai Character I want to play in The Dark Eye.

As far as I know Samurai usually had a Katana as a main and a Wakizashi as a second weapon (And maybe a Tanto, but im not sure). Now, one of my buddies knows a lot about weapons from the past, and he told me that Katanas tend to be overhyped by most systems, and a lot of people. A weapon mainly meant for cutting (Which I know), but cant deal with any form of heavier armor (which I didnt know).

Is this true? So wielding said gear would leave you utterly helpess in the face of someone wearing any form of Plate- and/ or Chainmail?

And, if that's the case, I'd be extra grateful for alternatives in terms of Equipment, who still somewhat keep in theme with a Japanese Warrior.

A katana is not a main weapon, that's a later "misconception". You were armed with a spear or naginata, maybe a no-dachi. And of course bows, matchlocks and such stuff too at times. Just as a sword for a western knight was not the main weapon used, but a flexible and useful secondary weapon.

And yes katanas have a certain mystique to them in the west, especially RPG crowds it seems. There is one really egregious example I read about on these forums.

Armour stops a katana, as it does any sword really. Cutting steel with steel is difficult no matter which way you turn. Upthread there is a long discussion on the "cutting of chainmail" and armour.
However armours have gaps and samurai armour was more of a lamellar style and not as encompassing as western plate from what I've seen so there were plenty of areas that would vulnerable enough to be cuts.

[Brother Oni]

Okay, quick question for a Samurai Character I want to play in The Dark Eye.

As far as I know Samurai usually had a Katana as a main and a Wakizashi as a second weapon (And maybe a Tanto, but im not sure). Now, one of my buddies knows a lot about weapons from the past, and he told me that Katanas tend to be overhyped by most systems, and a lot of people. A weapon mainly meant for cutting (Which I know), but cant deal with any form of heavier armor (which I didnt know).

Is this true? So wielding said gear would leave you utterly helpess in the face of someone wearing any form of Plate- and/ or Chainmail?

And, if that's the case, I'd be extra grateful for alternatives in terms of Equipment, who still somewhat keep in theme with a Japanese Warrior.

The katana and wakizashi are secondary and tertiary weapons, used only for duels and when they've lost their main weapon. Their main weapon was typically a spear (yari), which differs a bit from its western counterpart.

Spoiler: Yari

Show

There were also a number of other polearms used (not the naginata though as that was typically regarded as a woman's weapon) and some longer two handed swords (the nagamaki and odachi/nodachi)

Armour cracking was typically done by a kanabo or tetsubo (studded/spiked club):

Spoiler: Kanabo

Show

One of the samurai's primary weapons was the bow (daikyu)though, typically from horseback.

With regard to the katana being useless against heavier forms of armour, I'd say that's an over-exaggeration. While it is true that mail is particularly useful against a katana and that many people overhype the katana, it's still a well made 3ft sword.

While full plate harness is probably katana proof, it's also pretty much sword proof as well, not to mention the samurai wore some pretty hefty armour themselves, including some resembling lighter forms of plate (nanban-dou).

Spoiler: O-Yoroi

Show

Spoiler: Nanban-dou

Show

[Stuebi]

Very helpful, thank you two!

Would it be adequate then to have him use an Odachi as a main weapon, and a Katana as a second? I know it's a bit sword-focused, but the system makes handling multiple weapon types pretty difficult, and thus a spear would throw me offroad quite a bit. :D

Also, while I got some people hooked who know their stuff, is there an example of light to medium Japanese armour? The focus being that the wearer stays somewhat flexible.

[Spiryt]

This article may be helpful

As far as I understand, most 'full' Japanese armor was pretty strongly specialized for horse use, and flexibility was not most important aspect.

To be more 'flexible' one would probably just wear less complete sets of armor. Many probably were doing so for economical and practical reasons anyway.

[Storm_Of_Snow]

The katana and wakizashi are secondary and tertiary weapons, used only for duels and when they've lost their main weapon.

IIRC, in addition, the Katana was a symbol of a Samurai's honour.

As for the katana's popularity, I blame Highlander and the 80's influx of oriental media.

[Brother Oni]

Very helpful, thank you two!

Would it be adequate then to have him use an Odachi as a main weapon, and a Katana as a second? I know it's a bit sword-focused, but the system makes handling multiple weapon types pretty difficult, and thus a spear would throw me offroad quite a bit. :D

Also, while I got some people hooked who know their stuff, is there an example of light to medium Japanese armour? The focus being that the wearer stays somewhat flexible.

I see no issue with using an odachi primarily with a katana as secondary. I'll have to do some digging as my memory's a bit rusty but I think the katana would be worn with a wakizashi as the pair of weapons is a status symbol of being a samurai (the daisho), so that's three swords you'll be carrying around (bonus marks if you wield them all simultaneously ).

There's a whole host of lighter armour - the o-yoroi is heavy duty cavalry armour, so you presumably won't be wearing that as an infantryman.

The do-maru I linked to earlier is the infantry version of the o-yoroi and the haramaki is an alternate version of the do-maru.

There's an updated version of both the o-yoroi/do-maru, known as gusoku, which is what you typically see in movies these days (The Last Samurai had some nice examples). Gusoku is more flexible and lighter than the earlier amours, but is less protective.

There's the tatami style armour which straddles the medium/heavy border depending on which style you look at (karuta is on the heavier end). Kikko is the equivalent of brigandine, which I think puts it on the heavier end of medium in D&D terms.

Mail (kusari) has always been popular.

Bear in mind that most of the above are the main torso armour - there's a variety of other odds and ends to add on, like the helmet (kabuto), face mask (mempo) and the equivalent of under-armours.

Picture time:

Spoiler: Haramaki

Show

Spoiler: Karuta - Warning huge!

Show

Spoiler: Kikko

Show

Spoiler: Kusari

Show

Spoiler: Gusoku and auxillary armour

Show

Edit: thanks for that link Spiryt. I've learnt about this subject somewhat piecemeal and it's nice to find something more cohesive.

[GraaEminense]

...and some more digging indicates that all polearm use was right handed.

I have taught various polearms to a lot of people over the years and interestingly, polearm-handedness does not always correspond to right-/left-handedness. Most right-handed people instinctively lead with their left hand (which seems to be "correct" in period manuals), but many don´t -and the reverse is true with lefties.

Since both hands are used anyway, hand-preference is less important than with one-handed weapons but it is still there and needs to be considered (there are good reasons to lead with one hand over the other in many situations, but they are not always worth it if you have to use the "off" hand).

I´m guessing that formal training would teach a "correct" way to do it (because teachers get confused by lefty students), but that informal training would let people do whatever they found most natural. Just my 2 non-source-based cents.

[Lilapop]

Okay, quick question for a Samurai Character I want to play in The Dark Eye.

It always takes a bit of time for me to realize what system people are talking about when they say "The Dark Eye". Not am I more familiar with the german name (and especially the shorthand, DSA), but the english name isn't even an accurate translation - that'd be "The Black Eye".
On the katana question, I think D&D handles it quite well as a bastard sword of another name, with hints at non-masterwork specimen being rare (but no tangible difference when comparing the same level of both).

Since both hands are used anyway, hand-preference is less important than with one-handed weapons but it is still there and needs to be considered (there are good reasons to lead with one hand over the other in many situations, but they are not always worth it if you have to use the "off" hand).

When cutting a steak, I'm not sure my right hand would be as good at holding it down with a fork as my left is.
For the historical background, would a lefty who is told all his life to use the right hand even think of fighting with the left? If you do, and realize you're more effective that way, and bring it up to a tolerant (and opportunistic) officer - sure, you might get allowed to do it your way, if only because you could close up the shield wall on the right. But if you're subject to a bit of brainwashing while growing up, you probably won't even consider it.
Oh, and I remember phalanxes drifting to the left because the soldiers on the right flank didn't want to be on the right flank.

[Mike_G]

It always takes a bit of time for me to realize what system people are talking about when they say "The Dark Eye". Not am I more familiar with the german name (and especially the shorthand, DSA), but the english name isn't even an accurate translation - that'd be "The Black Eye".

In English, a "black eye" refers to the bruising around an eye you got punched in. So the connotation would be very different.

When cutting a steak, I'm not sure my right hand would be as good at holding it down with a fork as my left is.
For the historical background, would a lefty who is told all his life to use the right hand even think of fighting with the left? If you do, and realize you're more effective that way, and bring it up to a tolerant (and opportunistic) officer - sure, you might get allowed to do it your way, if only because you could close up the shield wall on the right. But if you're subject to a bit of brainwashing while growing up, you probably won't even consider it.
Oh, and I remember phalanxes drifting to the left because the soldiers on the right flank didn't want to be on the right flank.

Soldiers who were drilled in linear tactics would default to the right handed way of doing things. Early rifles were set up for right hand use, with the lock or the bolt on the right side, hard to operate with the left hand. In fact, even modern rifles (until the M16A2 came out in the mid 1980s) were set up for righties. The ejected brass would fly back and hit you in the face if you shot it left handed.

For a more individualized fighting culture like the Vikings, I don't think you'd have a sergeant trying to beat the left handedness out of you. If your different style gave you an advantage, it would be a good thing.

I fenced competitively for a few years in college, and lefties have an advantage over righties, since we usually face righties, but they are equally thrown off when facing another leftie. It's kinda funny.

[Knaight]

I have taught various polearms to a lot of people over the years and interestingly, polearm-handedness does not always correspond to right-/left-handedness. Most right-handed people instinctively lead with their left hand (which seems to be "correct" in period manuals), but many don´t -and the reverse is true with lefties.

I've noticed the same thing. I've also noticed that people are vastly, vastly better at leading with their preferred hand. I can fight with a sword in my left hand, despite being right handed - I won't be as good, but it's a fairly minor difference. If I try to lead with my right hand on a polearm, I'm downright terrible, and I say this as someone who's put more time into spears than every other weapon put together. This seems pretty typical from what I've seen in general.

[Brother Oni]

I´m guessing that formal training would teach a "correct" way to do it (because teachers get confused by lefty students), but that informal training would let people do whatever they found most natural. Just my 2 non-source-based cents.

I'm inclined to agree with you - I can see the handedness being beaten out of a Roman legionary or Greek hoplite, less so for a viking. The sources I found indicated that the right handed only polearm use was enforced for formation fighting.

With regard to the leading hand mentioned by both you and Knaight, I think it depends on how you were taught. My formal staff and jo training was ambidextrous, since switching is critical to effective use of the weapon.
From what I've seen of the qiang (Chinese spear), smacking people with the butt is also a viable option, which implies that switching is common with many Chinese polearms.

My western two handed spear training in my re-enactment group was far more informal and was fixed to dominant hand to the rear, since the leading hand wasn't able to help when also carrying a shield, so you needed the additional strength.

[snowblizz]

When cutting a steak, I'm not sure my right hand would be as good at holding it down with a fork as my left is.

Interestingly the "proper" way is to cut with the dominant hand and use the fork in the "off-hand".
I cut with my left hand and eat with the right despite being right-handed. Sometimes I switch because the right hand does have a stronger grip, but it always feels "off" when I do.

[Spiryt]

Le jeu de la hache

apparently has whole section on fighting against lefty opponent.

http://wiktenauer.com/wiki/Le_Jeu_de...ancais_1996%29

Effigies of left handed knights also probably aren't rare, though example I've seen mentioned is apparently hard to find/unavailable trough Google.

Jan Koniecpolski z Wielogłowów

As far as 'formation fighting' goes, we have to remember that all the way to the at least 15th century any kind of more 'centrally plained' drilling was probably quite rare.

Trough most Medieval period, even if actual formations had happened, they were more of a loose ideas, or just attempts to keep men as a solid 'block', apparently including seemingly awkward concepts as tying fellows together, and holding one spear together.

[Storm Bringer]

question for those who are more knowledgeable about russain equipment than i am:

what the HELL is that thing at 3:32?

edit: a quick wikipedia scan shows it's one of these, which i have never heard of before, dispite looking bloody awesome. it looks like something out of Traveller or some other Sci fi RPG.

[AgentPaper]

Interestingly the "proper" way is to cut with the dominant hand and use the fork in the "off-hand".
I cut with my left hand and eat with the right despite being right-handed. Sometimes I switch because the right hand does have a stronger grip, but it always feels "off" when I do.

When I was a kid, I used to cut the same way you do, but my father taught me to cut with my right hand and hold my fork with my left, and after a while doing that it become more natural than doing it the other way. Butter knives are also designed with this method in mind; the edge of the blade is angled to the left, such that the cut piece of butter is pushed to the right and the block stays put. If you use your left hand and cut the other side of the block of butter, it tends to slip off and make it harder to cut neat pieces.

[snowblizz]

When I was a kid, I used to cut the same way you do, but my father taught me to cut with my right hand and hold my fork with my left, and after a while doing that it become more natural than doing it the other way. Butter knives are also designed with this method in mind; the edge of the blade is angled to the left, such that the cut piece of butter is pushed to the right and the block stays put. If you use your left hand and cut the other side of the block of butter, it tends to slip off and make it harder to cut neat pieces.

Funnily enough I have a set of utensils which are clearly designed to be used the "right" way, the knives are very awkward to use due to some angling of the end of the "haft" I supposed is meant to be "design". Forks and spoons all have a "downward" angle so hand doesn't matter, but the knives poke the end into your hand if used in the left.
Sucks to be a lefty still or to eat as one at any rate.

A lot of people spent a lot of effort to teach me the "right" way to do things. I still remember the stupid "hold the pen right" contraptions. I told all to f*** off and did it my way.

[AgentPaper]

Funnily enough I have a set of utensils which are clearly designed to be used the "right" way, the knives are very awkward to use due to some angling of the end of the "haft" I supposed is meant to be "design". Forks and spoons all have a "downward" angle so hand doesn't matter, but the knives poke the end into your hand if used in the left.
Sucks to be a lefty still or to eat as one at any rate.

A lot of people spent a lot of effort to teach me the "right" way to do things. I still remember the stupid "hold the pen right" contraptions. I told all to f*** off and did it my way.

Well, they are the "right" way to do it for a reason. The only thing worse than blindly following established conventions is blindly ignoring them.

[Knaight]

Well, they are the "right" way to do it for a reason. The only thing worse than blindly following established conventions is blindly ignoring them.

As regards writing utensils, sure. It does work a bit better. Handedness and such regarding eating utensils? It's totally irrelevant. Just about everyone over the age of 5 without some sort of actual muscular or nervous disorder in the way can manage familiar utensils* just fine, regardless of how proper the techniques are.

*I emphasize familiar here - someone who lives in an area where chopsticks aren't standard is by no means guaranteed to pick them up.

[AgentPaper]

As regards writing utensils, sure. It does work a bit better. Handedness and such regarding eating utensils? It's totally irrelevant. Just about everyone over the age of 5 without some sort of actual muscular or nervous disorder in the way can manage familiar utensils* just fine, regardless of how proper the techniques are.

*I emphasize familiar here - someone who lives in an area where chopsticks aren't standard is by no means guaranteed to pick them up.

I was only talking about knives, and specifically (most) butter knives which are shaped to be easier to use when you're using it in your right hand. Obviously all the other utensils are shaped symmetrically so the hand you use it in doesn't matter as long as you're used to it.

[Zadhadras]

Okay, quick question for a Samurai Character I want to play in The Dark Eye.

As far as I know Samurai usually had a Katana as a main and a Wakizashi as a second weapon (And maybe a Tanto, but im not sure). Now, one of my buddies knows a lot about weapons from the past, and he told me that Katanas tend to be overhyped by most systems, and a lot of people. A weapon mainly meant for cutting (Which I know), but cant deal with any form of heavier armor (which I didnt know).

Is this true? So wielding said gear would leave you utterly helpess in the face of someone wearing any form of Plate- and/ or Chainmail?

And, if that's the case, I'd be extra grateful for alternatives in terms of Equipment, who still somewhat keep in theme with a Japanese Warrior.

Like their european counterparts, the Japanese developed techniques for fighting men in armour. They are known collectively as Yoroi Kumiuchi, or "armoured wrestling". If they are in a situation where they have a sword and they are facing another well armoured man, they will likely move into grappling very quickly.

This video here shows some of these techniques. The most pertinent part starts around 2:05

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwEQaClH-B8

[Rhynn]

Is this true? So wielding said gear would leave you utterly helpess in the face of someone wearing any form of Plate- and/ or Chainmail?

Swords cannot cut metal armor, basically ever at all (go on, try to use a steel knife to cut some steel...) - a cut or hewing blow probably won't even dent armor, and with the padding always worn with mail armor, you're probably not going to deal any appreciable trauma, at least reliably enough to make it useful. Thrusting attacks can theoretically maybe pierce mail, and at least dent plate, but swords are not ideal for those to begin with.

However, there's several alleviating conditions:

First, full coverage armor was historically rare. Your opponent will probably have exposed body parts - the face, neck, throat, and legs (lower legs especially). You can strike at those.

Second, thrusts can possibly pierce armor a bit, and they can strike very small exposed spots if done right.

A katana can thrust, and one of the four strikes preserved modern kendo* - the tsuki - is a thrust to throat. It can be a tricky one, and (at least where I practiced) beginners aren't even taught it, much less allowed to do it, but I saw one of the dan-rank students perform it four times in a row on one student (every time he started moving forward), going under the throat-guard and just stopping the sword there, because the student kept lifting his chin and exposing his throat (which is dangerous and hugely bad form!).

However, a metal gorget, especially one you'd find on Renaissance full harness, will make such a thrust much less useful - probably worthless.

Finally, there's how people actually fought in armor with swords: I suspect a samurai would fight with a sword much like a European Renaissance knight would: by grappling. A katana is probably less useful as a lever, but combine kenjutsu with jujutsu, and you'll probably have something much like European harnischfechten (armored longsword fighting). Your goal would be to disarm your opponent or, even better, get him in a lock or on the ground, then go for somewhere unarmored (the eyes, the throat, under the arms, pull off the helmet) with your katana, wakizashi, or tanto.


And yes, an actual Sengoku-period samurai's main weapons would be a spear and a bow (mounted and on foot) or teppo (handgun/musket), and the swords are sidearms. And, obviously, Sengoku-period samurai armor wasn't really as good as 1400s/1500s European knightly armor (relative scarcity of iron, etc.).


* The others being men (hewing cut/chop to the head, either top, left, or right; struck from above), kote (hewing cut/chop to the wrist, left or right), and do (slash/raking cut to the stomach/sides, left or right).

[Matthew]

Just to add to the samurai weapons business, the predecessors of the katana and wakizashi were the tachi and the tanto, the latter combination apparently was still worn by some high ranking samurai even when the katana and wakizashi had largely replaced them. Might make for a bit of a twist on the standard samurai character.

[Rhynn]

AFAIK the buke (samurai) class switched to the daisho (katana & wakizashi) but the kuge (Imperial aristocrats) class kept wearing the tachi. They were apparently worn differently: the katana edge up (tucked through the belt), the tachi edge down (sometimes hung rather than tucked through the belt).

[Ashkhar Ben]

Hey everyone, as always, sorry to derail the current topic/ask a question that's already been asked, but:

Picture a giant crab monster, say 30 feet in diameter. This crab like creature has an extremely strong carapace in certain areas, but not mythical/dragon scale level.

To counter and kill these creatures, there's a group of knights that ride atop a creature very similar to the Paraceratherium wielding extremely long and heavy lances.

I understand there would be an insane amount of pressure on the rider if they brought such a lance to bear and then actually successfully impacted the large crab thing. What kind of logistics would be necessary to prevent the rider from just flying off of the back of his mount, or ripping his arm and shoulder off. I'm thinking perhaps some kind of guided platform in which the lance is semi-permanently attached to the steed's saddle or harness.

Would a 30-40' lance be too cumbersome? Would a team of say two to four riders be better suited for such a task?

As far as alternate weapons, I'm open to the idea, but I can't get this image out of my head and I really want to see if it could "realistically" work.

Thanks!

[AgentPaper]

Hey everyone, as always, sorry to derail the current topic/ask a question that's already been asked, but:

Picture a giant crab monster, say 30 feet in diameter. This crab like creature has an extremely strong carapace in certain areas, but not mythical/dragon scale level.

To counter and kill these creatures, there's a group of knights that ride atop a creature very similar to the Paraceratherium wielding extremely long and heavy lances.

I understand there would be an insane amount of pressure on the rider if they brought such a lance to bear and then actually successfully impacted the large crab thing. What kind of logistics would be necessary to prevent the rider from just flying off of the back of his mount, or ripping his arm and shoulder off. I'm thinking perhaps some kind of guided platform in which the lance is semi-permanently attached to the steed's saddle or harness.

Would a 30-40' lance be too cumbersome? Would a team of say two to four riders be better suited for such a task?

As far as alternate weapons, I'm open to the idea, but I can't get this image out of my head and I really want to see if it could "realistically" work.

Thanks!

Well, for one, mounted lancers wouldn't be the way to counter such a creature. Large ballistae would be ideal (assuming cannons aren't available yet), but short of that, I'd expect the most effective tactic would be to take axes to it's legs until it can't move, and then either hack at it's body until it dies, wait for backup to come with a ballista, or just leave it until it dies on it's own. Charging it with paraceratherium cavalry would probably work about as well as charging an elephant with a horse. That is to say, not well.

If you're more interested in rule of cool, though, lances could work, but unless the crab's armor is significantly tougher than steel plate, I don't think a fixed holder would be necessary, and neither would a 40' lance. The Hussars used a 20' lance, and I don't think they used any special equipment to use it. Even on your paraceratherium, that would stretch a good 10 feet past it's head, which should be plenty of penetration.

Also notable, is that the heart of a crab is at the top of it's body, centered on it's back. Assuming your crab monsters have the same physiology, a potential tactic would be to have some one climb or jump on top of it, then stab it there to kill it. The heart is right below the surface, so a large sword should be plenty to penetrate it.

[Ashkhar Ben]

*snip*

Thanks for the insight! And the ballistae are ideal and make perfect sense. For setting reasons (and coolness reasons) that's not always practical. But I'm glad that you think it reasonable a single rider and lance could tackle such a creature (however it being a non-ideal tactic.)

If the size of the two creatures were more comparable, would that switch the plausibility of a rider and lance combination?

[AgentPaper]

Thanks for the insight! And the ballistae are ideal and make perfect sense. For setting reasons (and coolness reasons) that's not always practical. But I'm glad that you think it reasonable a single rider and lance could tackle such a creature (however it being a non-ideal tactic.)

If the size of the two creatures were more comparable, would that switch the plausibility of a rider and lance combination?

Hm, not really. The whole point of a cavalry charge is to instill fear into infantry and break them up, so they can be overrun. If the infantry don't run, the charge can still be effective, but is usually much more costly, and against densely packed and disciplined heavy infantry, the cavalry charge is useless.

With the charge, all you really have going for you is the initial impact. If you can kill the crab instantly in that single blow, then great, but if not, then you're basically a sitting duck waiting to be snipped into pieces by it's claws. Better to attack it from where it can't see or hit you, which means from the sides and the back. You still have to worry about it's legs slamming into you, but you at least have a chance of avoiding those.

Depending on carapace thickness, light infantry with javelins may also be a useful tactic. This was the tactic that the Romans used against Elephants, sticking it with spears until it died of blood loss or went mad with fear and pain.

[Ashkhar Ben]

Hm, not really. The whole point of a cavalry charge is to instill fear into infantry and break them up, so they can be overrun. If the infantry don't run, the charge can still be effective, but is usually much more costly, and against densely packed and disciplined heavy infantry, the cavalry charge is useless.

With the charge, all you really have going for you is the initial impact. If you can kill the crab instantly in that single blow, then great, but if not, then you're basically a sitting duck waiting to be snipped into pieces by it's claws. Better to attack it from where it can't see or hit you, which means from the sides and the back. You still have to worry about it's legs slamming into you, but you at least have a chance of avoiding those.

Depending on carapace thickness, light infantry with javelins may also be a useful tactic. This was the tactic that the Romans used against Elephants, sticking it with spears until it died of blood loss or went mad with fear and pain.

Makes sense, although I'm seeing kind of a combined force. Even against a single crab, you could have five or six riders atop the big steed, only one of which has a lance, and maybe one other is the pilot. The remaining four can all jump off of the steed onto the thing's back where it is least flexible, and start stabbing down into it with spears or swords or whatever. Meanwhile the lance breaks or is let go and the rider just keeps riding away from the thing. If it really came to snip snip time, I think a mammal of that size, sufficiently armored, could hold its own for a few seconds before the rider could steer it away.

But yeah, better to just crush the thing from a distance with ballistae or similar. Thanks again!