Double ended blunt weapon?

[tyckspoon]

But, I mean...if you hold it vertically, you're not holding it in the middle--you can hold it from the other end. Wouldn't that mean more distance is covered, leading to more acceleration--and more momentum?

If you're holding it from one end, you're not using it as a double weapon. Congratulations, you've recreated the polearm. You might be able to lever back faster with a center-grip, yeah, but at that point you've already made the decision that potentially striking faster/recovering to ready/guard position faster is worth not getting the extra force behind using the longer grip for more lever length. Which it may well be, if your magical attachments/enhancements/whatever provide sufficient power on their own.

[Brother Oni]

Interesting. I should have known on I, it's been too long since my anime days. It was rendered as 'devil' by a casual translation, otherwise if had it. XD
Majo? That's interesting. The root for the DBZ majin, then? I assumed from mahotsukai, really.

More off topic stuff:

Spoiler: Japanese lesson

Show

Not quite - majin is 魔人, which is literally 'demon people'. Majo (魔女) as you've noted, is literally 'demon girl' but reads as 'witch'.

The issue is that kanji doesn't represent a word, it represents an idea or concept, thus the exact meaning changes depending on the context.
Breaking down words to their roots can also lead to misunderstandings in any language, particularly when you start taking each root out of context. The town Swindon isn't a pig hill (it is a bloody miserable place though) and the less said about Scunthorpe the better...

[Knaight]

swinging downward does not have more momentum than swinging sideways, except for negligible amounts of gravity and air resistance changes.

There's also the matter of the extent to which the ability to exert force is an effect of the physiology of the person exerting it, along with the shape of the target, along with the effects of the physiology of the time requirements of the strike. Given all that, the claim that downward and sideways are equivalent is somewhat dubious - gravity and air resistance aren't even pertinent.

[SiuiS]

More off topic stuff:

Spoiler: Japanese lesson

Show

Not quite - majin is 魔人, which is literally 'demon people'. Majo (魔女) as you've noted, is literally 'demon girl' but reads as 'witch'.

The issue is that kanji doesn't represent a word, it represents an idea or concept, thus the exact meaning changes depending on the context.
Breaking down words to their roots can also lead to misunderstandings in any language, particularly when you start taking each root out of context. The town Swindon isn't a pig hill (it is a bloody miserable place though) and the less said about Scunthorpe the better...

Oh, I misunderstood, then. I meant maho as my understanding of just "magic" which contains "oni". Not that the extent to whicch I am wrong matters, but... XD

There's also the matter of the extent to which the ability to exert force is an effect of the physiology of the person exerting it, along with the shape of the target, along with the effects of the physiology of the time requirements of the strike. Given all that, the claim that downward and sideways are equivalent is somewhat dubious - gravity and air resistance aren't even pertinent.

Yes, very much so! This came up all the time with LARP weapon stuff. Often new kids would go for the single most efficient weapon, but would not have the strength, agility or reflexes to take advantage of them. There's a minimum weight where a lighter weapon will not actually be faster because you've reached the maximum of your arm meat to motivate the lever, and actually require more mass to make arresting the lever after a swing possible without wrenching your own arm out of the socket - because you either have to do poorly on the acceleration, or else fight the acceleration at full power using only your own musculature, which is by no means as good at pulling in force as it is at exerting it.

Kinetic energy is mass times the square of velocity, but people fail to remember that this just gives you the energy, and what you do with it is it's own equation! Accelerating it to velocity, the distance traveled and the arc, angle, the ability to stop it afterwards or redirect... All worthwhile to understand.

[Closet_Skeleton]

Surely there must be an opportunity cost to learning the knife, though? It's not as if the USMC has an infinite amount of time to train in.

Yes they kind of do. They're elite forces, not conscripts or reserves. They have only two jobs, fighting and being the best at fighting. If they have to waste time doing jobs other soldiers can do then they're over-stretched.

So...what you're saying is a horizontal stance could be EQUALLY fast as a vertical stance, and hurt as much?

Sounds like you understand weapon speed purely in a RPG mechanics sense.

Using two weapons is not faster than using one weapon in real life.

Weapon speed is almost irrelevant in a real fight. Reach is more important as a weapon property and footwork is more important as a skill. If one martial artist spends all his time training to punch faster and another spends all his time practising footwork then the footwork guy will be able to strike first every time.

But, I mean...if you hold it vertically, you're not holding it in the middle--you can hold it from the other end. Wouldn't that mean more distance is covered, leading to more acceleration--and more momentum?

Holding a staff from one end is generally better than holding it in the middle for that reason. Since holding it in the middle is needed to use both ends effectively, using both ends is kind of a bad idea and not actually done very often.

If your fighting style is defined as 'Vertical' vs 'horizontal' then its a terribly limited style and you're probably already dead. You want to be as dynamic as possible, you can't 'attack quickly' if you can't attack using the opportunities open to you in an actual fight.

Sometimes you can hit someone with your staff and then swing your staff round and hit someone with other end. What you cannot do is build a entire fighting style around that as a method of attack. It is completely possible to change your grip on a weapon during a fight. There are some 'finishing moves' in European Longsword fighting where you change to a half-sword or reverse grip just to exploit an opening you created while holding your weapon differently and you can also follow up one handed attacks with their longer reach with more powerful two handed attacks once you close distance.

Okay seriously, I'd like to know: Would a blunt weapon, if weight wasn't a concern (through magic or whatever else) with something other than stick on both ends be viable if used in a horizontal stance?

If weight isn't a concern with due to magic, why would you care about being able to hit with both ends. If your weapon has so much momentum it can kill anyone with one strike you don't need to hit them twice. It would only become important when you're fighting against a group, but then its no longer about attacking faster, its about being able to attack and defend from a wider variety of directions. You'd change to a stance that didn't allow you to use the other end in a one on one fight.

[Lheticus]

Sounds like you understand weapon speed purely in a RPG mechanics sense.

Well, I mean...should a geek like me that abhors combat in real life in fact have more realistic understanding? XD ^^;

Using two weapons is not faster than using one weapon in real life.

Weapon speed is almost irrelevant in a real fight. Reach is more important as a weapon property and footwork is more important as a skill. If one martial artist spends all his time training to punch faster and another spends all his time practising footwork then the footwork guy will be able to strike first every time.

Gah...buzzkill on Aisle Five. D: I just really think the concept of a double ended weapon is cool, and so I want to make it work. Maybe it REALLY can't? D: D: D:

Holding a staff from one end is generally better than holding it in the middle for that reason. Since holding it in the middle is needed to use both ends effectively, using both ends is kind of a bad idea and not actually done very often.

If your fighting style is defined as 'Vertical' vs 'horizontal' then its a terribly limited style and you're probably already dead. You want to be as dynamic as possible, you can't 'attack quickly' if you can't attack using the opportunities open to you in an actual fight.

Sometimes you can hit someone with your staff and then swing your staff round and hit someone with other end. What you cannot do is build a entire fighting style around that as a method of attack. It is completely possible to change your grip on a weapon during a fight. There are some 'finishing moves' in European Longsword fighting where you change to a half-sword or reverse grip just to exploit an opening you created while holding your weapon differently and you can also follow up one handed attacks with their longer reach with more powerful two handed attacks once you close distance.

I'm not building a fighting style, I'm building a weapon and trying to figure if there is a viable fighting style for it?

If weight isn't a concern with due to magic, why would you care about being able to hit with both ends.

Um, because it's COOL? ^^; I mean...I COULD just go "Rule of Cool" on this, but I like things I write to have a basis with a realism factor of > 0, even the Rule of Cool stuff.

If your weapon has so much momentum it can kill anyone with one strike

Okaaaaaay, ya lost me. "Kill anyone with one strike" is a bit too much realism, honestly. The world this weapon will be found in is not going be one with bullets/bullet grade efficiency killing technology.

[SiuiS]

snip

Alternately, someone who doesn't even know the physics of kinetic energy through levers shouldn't be required to have a realistic view of combat training. Some of these are "no, that just plain cannot work or make sense ever", but some are just terribly inefficient; something easily overcome in stories or games.

[Sorrcerousflux]

Alternately, someone who doesn't even know the physics of kinetic energy through levers shouldn't be required to have a realistic view of combat training. Some of these are "no, that just plain cannot work or make sense ever", but some are just terribly inefficient; something easily overcome in stories or games.

By magic, witch basically means he just needs help with ideas because physics dosent matter at all, am-I-right?

Hech he could get away with having telekineticly controlled stones capable of forming any weapon he wants.

Or have giant rockets on your weapon that boost it to insane speeds but (because magic) the wielder is completely safe.

[SiuiS]

By magic, witch basically means he just needs help with ideas because physics dosent matter at all, am-I-right?

No, just by deempahisizing realism. I mean, one of my earlier memories of weapons was Tuxedo Mask's stick, that was basically a cane. And then I played games like soul calibur. And you can watch all sorts of animes and shows that have people tossed around by realistically impotent and insulting moves because they are "that strong". Like, a a guy kicks upward, toes to your chin, then leaves his leg hanging there, then drops his heel two inches into your nose. Not his whole leg, just bends his knee. That's not gonna do anything, but it still does as intended; demonstrate proficiency of the user. Even though it isnt' realistic in the slightest.

[Stardrake]

Okaaaaaay, ya lost me. "Kill anyone with one strike" is a bit too much realism, honestly. The world this weapon will be found in is not going be one with bullets/bullet grade efficiency killing technology.

And according to one video I've seen (do a search on 'skallagrim' on YouTube) attempting one-hit kills with medieval melee weapons generally weren't a good idea. Anything short of an actual decapitation (or removal of their sword arm or the like would still leave a mortally wounded opponent time to strike back before they expire and nothing to lose by doing so, while such fierce blows usually leave the attacker open to just such a revenge strike... and that's assuming you get past the opponent's defense in the first place.

[Closet_Skeleton]

Gah...buzzkill on Aisle Five. D: I just really think the concept of a double ended weapon is cool, and so I want to make it work. Maybe it REALLY can't? D: D: D:

Three-sectioned staves and quarter staves can be used with both ends. Its just not the best way to actually use a staff in a lot of situations.

Technically a sword is a double-ended weapon because its occasionally a relevant tactic to hit people with the pommel. Its not worth having a specialised to deal damage pommel though.

I'm not building a fighting style, I'm building a weapon and trying to figure if there is a viable fighting style for it?

That's perfectly fine logic if you just picked up a random object as an improvised weapon, its terrible logic for purchasing a weapon before you go into battle.

Okaaaaaay, ya lost me. "Kill anyone with one strike" is a bit too much realism, honestly. The world this weapon will be found in is not going be one with bullets/bullet grade efficiency killing technology.

A regular quarter staff, just a piece of wood, can easily kill in one strike to the head. Anything more powerful than a quarter staff due to magic is going to be overkill against unarmoured non-magical humans.

People have survived being hit by 20 bullets and people have died from single arrows. Absence of guns doesn't really matter much.

If you want to have overly powerful weapons, you need overly powerful targets. If the enemies are supernatural creatures then there's no reason why any laws of physics should be relevant to fighting them. If your enemies have magically enhanced armour then magically enhances weapons don't have to be overkill, but if you just up the offensive power without compensating with defensive power you're going to have a very bloody setting.

[Tzevaot]

Can't you just use a double ended balded weapon? They are impossible enough.

[S@tanicoaldo]

Are you looking for soemthing like this?

Spoiler

Show

I guess it is the closest picture of a Double ended blunt weapon.

[Asta Kask]

Or this, for something designed to strike:

[Gnomvid]

It's already been established earlier in the thread the OP was indeed basically imagining a dumbbell

Edit: where the "weights" would be magically weightless to the wielder but not to the recipient of either end

[Asta Kask]

Sorry. It's just that after a certain amount of pages the thread begins to replicate itself. Or be about Hitler. Either one.

[Lheticus]

Or this, for something designed to strike:

Yeah--honestly I drew a lot of inspiration from the American Gladiators Joust.

[Asta Kask]

There's the Double Mace from Arms&Equipment Guide (see here)

Has that been mentioned yet?

[Closet_Skeleton]

Yeah--honestly I drew a lot of inspiration from the American Gladiators Joust.

The whole point of that being absolute ineffectiveness.

[Lheticus]

The whole point of that being absolute ineffectiveness.

I thought the whole point of it was to poke the opponent enough to fall off the platform? :P

[Jay R]

Are you looking for soemthing like this?

Or this, for something designed to strike:

I sure am. (Well, except for the silly weapon she's holding.)

[Lheticus]

I sure am. (Well, except for the silly weapon she's holding.)

LOL! 1,000 YES points awarded for your 100ccs of humor injected in this thread.

[Closet_Skeleton]

I thought the whole point of it was to poke the opponent enough to fall off the platform? :P

While limiting all other possible occurrences.

Well, technically its there to allow people to do avoid other possible occurrences while wearing tight spandex rather than padded body armour.

If you want something based off a silly sport you could just have a silly magic contact sport. But then using those weapons outside of the sport would be as silly as someone going into battle in American Football armour and tackling his enemies.

[Gnomvid]

To be fair it's a fictional world from Lheticus imagination there's no need for anything in it to make sense from a real world point of view, if he wants nonsensical weapons because they seem cool to him let him it's his world.

[Asta Kask]

Then my suggestion is that he makes a double-mace weapon, an exotic weapon doing 1d8/1d8 x2.

[factotum]

To be fair it's a fictional world from Lheticus imagination there's no need for anything in it to make sense from a real world point of view, if he wants nonsensical weapons because they seem cool to him let him it's his world.

Presumably, though, if Lheticus himself doesn't care if his weapon makes sense, he wouldn't have asked if it did on the forum?

[Lheticus]

Presumably, though, if Lheticus himself doesn't care if his weapon makes sense, he wouldn't have asked if it did on the forum?

Correct--I at least wanted there to be a possible circumstance where the base concept of a 2-ended blunt weapon would make sense.

[SiuiS]

Staff fighting (which is what you would do even if not with a staff) is a firmly established thing, so yeah you make sense. :)

[Lheticus]

Staff fighting (which is what you would do even if not with a staff) is a firmly established thing, so yeah you make sense. :)

But staff fighting doesn't necessitate a blunt object on both ends of the staff, so I don't. :(

[Jay R]

Correct--I at least wanted there to be a possible circumstance where the base concept of a 2-ended blunt weapon would make sense.

Both ends of the quarterstaff are used, but because the two ends aren't weighted, it's pretty useless against armored foes. It's pretty much a peasant's weapon.

A blunt weapons is a mass weapon. I can't imagine it working well with a large mass on the wrong end - it would slow the weapon down for no particular gain. So I suspect that there is no such thing as a two-ended blunt weapon - except in the sense that if my mace head has been forced back, I can still whap my opponent in his (unarmored) nose with the pommel.

Certainly, if I had a two-headed mass weapon, and had time to modify it before a fight, I would take one of the heads off to make it a more effective weapon.