Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

[Shuruke]

How heavy would be overboard for a Chinese sword breaker that instead of 34 inches long would be around 50?

The idea is for a strong nimble character who uses this intimidating weapon with a fancy Spada De Lato gaurd

I looked it up and for sword breaker Jia'n roughly 34.2 inches for whole sword was roughly 3.7 lbs

So would 50 inches and 5.3 lbs be realistically manageable

[Brother Oni]

How heavy would be overboard for a Chinese sword breaker that instead of 34 inches long would be around 50?

The idea is for a strong nimble character who uses this intimidating weapon with a fancy Spada De Lato gaurd

I looked it up and for sword breaker Jia'n roughly 34.2 inches for whole sword was roughly 3.7 lbs

So would 50 inches and 5.3 lbs be realistically manageable

There is a two handed version of the swordbreaker (the Dan Jian) which is probably what you want. The recorded weight of a two handed jian was 10~20 catties with length of 4 chi 9 cun, which is 5.9-11.8kg (13-26lb) and 156.8cm (61.7in)

Note that the weight of a weapon doesn't go up linearly with the length since you have to make the base thicker to support the longer length and for such a long weapon, you want to make it two handed, which increases the length of the tang and hilt.
The large weight variance for the same length is due to different material types used in its construction (bronze, iron or steel and the different alloys thereof).

Spoiler: Tie Jian (far left) from the Wu Bei Yao Lue

Show

For regulars on the board, the bar mace (jiǎn 鐧) is pronounced differently from the sword (jiàn 劍) and aren't homophones.

[Jeivar]

I'm curious: Can someone answer me why eastern Asia seems to have a much stronger traditional of unarmed combat styles than other parts of the world?

[gkathellar]

Also, there's so much more resistance to surpass, that either the drop in range would be so big as to make the weapon pointless or require so much energy that the shooter would need absurd levels of strength just to get the projectile to fly more than a few yeards.

Just to expand on this (although I suspect it's what you're referring to already), a fair bit of that resistance may apply to the string itself, which is going to waste energy just displacing the fluid around it. The projectile will of course be supported somewhat by the water, but it's not going to have much force or distance. You might be able to work around that by shooting in the direction of the current, but it still probably wouldn't be as good.

Water is weird, and considering the hypothetical issues an underwater society would face makes my head hurt because of all the ways living in the water would make things weird.

[Mike_G]

How heavy would be overboard for a Chinese sword breaker that instead of 34 inches long would be around 50?

The idea is for a strong nimble character who uses this intimidating weapon with a fancy Spada De Lato gaurd

I looked it up and for sword breaker Jia'n roughly 34.2 inches for whole sword was roughly 3.7 lbs

So would 50 inches and 5.3 lbs be realistically manageable

I really don't think that's a reasonable size for a one hander. Five pounds is really heavy, and 50 inches is really long. There are a few rapiers that approach that length, but with that weight, you're in longsword territory.

You can kinda use it one handed, but you aren't going to stop it or change direction in a cut, so forget the feint, and forget a quick recovery, so you'll need something in your off hand to parry with, because there's no way you'll be able to get back on guard to stop the riposte if you don't finish him off with your attack.

So I would say that's a bad sword for a human sized character, even a strong one.

[Khedrac]

I'm curious: Can someone answer me why eastern Asia seems to have a much stronger traditional of unarmed combat styles than other parts of the world?

I am reasonably certain that the answers to this (as it will vary for the different countries involved) will all come down to the local political circumstances - and that's one of the things we cannot discuss on these boards.

A lesser, secondary, factor is the appeal of the distant - the unarmed styles of other regions are supposed to be pretty effective too (e.g. savate from France) but one rarely hears of them because Western culture currently has a degree of fascination with the Orient.

[paddyfool]

I'm curious: Can someone answer me why eastern Asia seems to have a much stronger traditional of unarmed combat styles than other parts of the world?

You may not be looking all that closely at the rest of the world - both grappling and striking arts pop up all over the place in one form or other. Particularly as sparring sports, but also with applications to military training etc.

One feature is a bit unusual about east asia, however: the connection to religious, monastic traditions is particularly strong. And within these traditions, you have a lot of people with the time for regular, long term specialist training from childhood in such a discipline. Also with other focuses to the training, eg the large focus on its use as a means to personal development and enlightenment. Or the (ahem) claims of supernatural feats by practitioners.

[Brother Oni]

I'm curious: Can someone answer me why eastern Asia seems to have a much stronger traditional of unarmed combat styles than other parts of the world?

This is a very complicated subject - this is just my viewpoint, please don't take it as fact.

In Japan, the reason for this is quite clear cut in my opinion - during the early Edo period, the new government disarmed all the peasants to cement their power and to prevent further armed uprising (the various sword hunts). Various forms of unarmed techniques were developed as self defence against misbehaving samurai who were still armed.
This also lead to the variety of exotic Japanese martial arts which have been derived from farming implements.

Since the Edo was a long period of stability with minimal outside influences, the various unarmed martial arts styles spread to the samurai and hence persisted up until the late 19th Century.


China is more complicated, but in my opinion, most dynasty changes was just a change in the ruling caste, the civil service and hence the bureaucracy that made up the backbone of the infrastructure carried on regardless. With this sort of continuity, it was easier to pass on skills and with the various militaries requiring competency assessments and examination for rank advancement, that only perpetuated the continuation of martial arts.

There are multiple Chinese manuals on unarmed techniques (both for the battlefield and off), and references to fighting system date back as far as the 8th Century BC in the Spring and Autumn Annals.


I'm afraid I don't know enough about the history or culture of other SE Asian countries to comment, nor enough about the history of Greece to say why pankration (7th Century BC) didn't persist whereas Chinese ones did.

[Shuruke]

There is a two handed version of the swordbreaker (the Tie Jian) which is probably what you want. The recorded weight of a two handed jian was 10~20 catties with length of 4 chi 9 cun, which is 5.9-11.8kg (13-26lb) and 156.8cm (61.7in)

Note that the weight of a weapon doesn't go up linearly with the length since you have to make the base thicker to support the longer length and for such a long weapon, you want to make it two handed, which increases the length of the tang and hilt.
The large weight variance for the same length is due to different material types used in its construction (bronze, iron or steel and the different alloys thereof).

The idea is like the love child between the Chinese sword breaker and a rapier

Looking at more facts (I don't generally look at stuff like this currently doing it for art research)
Most rapiers were around 40-45 inches and only weighed few lbs

How would I mix these realistically and effectively

The character in question is 5 foot 6 and has strength/ agility maxed out.
Not sure how a rapier usually compares in length to wielder but I'd like for this weapon to be at least 38 inches and probably at most 42 inches

Itd probably be slightly thinner but I'd like to keep the weight pretty heavy

So between 4-5 lbs?


Heavier than most swords but lighter than the Jian?

[Shuruke]

I really don't think that's a reasonable size for a one hander. Five pounds is really heavy, and 50 inches is really long. There are a few rapiers that approach that length, but with that weight, you're in longsword territory.

You can kinda use it one handed, but you aren't going to stop it or change direction in a cut, so forget the feint, and forget a quick recovery, so you'll need something in your off hand to parry with, because there's no way you'll be able to get back on guard to stop the riposte if you don't finish him off with your attack.

So I would say that's a bad sword for a human sized character, even a strong one.

what do u believe the ideal size for a mix of the two to be then?
I was just kinda throwing out numbers hoping to be corrected

If we make it a mix if the two it'd be shorter than rapier and slightly lighter than breaker while retaining the shape of breaker for hitting wrists etc and allow agile use like rapier?

[The Jack]

I'm curious: Can someone answer me why eastern Asia seems to have a much stronger traditional of unarmed combat styles than other parts of the world?

Because we used guns more, we marginalized our warrior caste, and there's a big social difference between nations that progressed themselves (or only stole increments) and nations that adopted massive progress from others. The short of it is that those at the front of development tend to say 'bugger the past' whilst those who have technology thrust upon them strive to keep traditions.


Europeans largely ended nobility being a big deal 300-400 years ago, we don't care for tales of knights like the japanese care for samurai (who've only been gone for about 150 years) or the thai who had a king that gambled his country on a boxing match. So we're more distanced and we care less.

[hymer]

While we're on the subject of unarmed martial arts:

What style of unarmed fighting goes better with what body type? If you'd prefer to narrow it down, pick a martial art or a body type and match it on the other end.

[jjordan]

I'm curious: Can someone answer me why eastern Asia seems to have a much stronger traditional of unarmed combat styles than other parts of the world?

Good question and there are a lot of theories on the subject. I mostly subscribe to the idea that 'forward thinking' led to abandoning the past. But there's also the fact that in the East martial arts are also a path to physical health, so much so that martial arts masters frequently did double duty as physicians.

In the off chance that people are not aware of the rich tradition of European martial arts I'll drop a link to Wicktenauer so you can explore the material. I'm particularly fond of Fiore dei Liberi's work which integrates unarmed and armed combat in a full spectrum system. https://wiktenauer.com/

[HeadlessMermaid]

I'm afraid I don't know enough about the history or culture of other SE Asian countries to comment, nor enough about the history of Greece to say why pankration (7th Century BC) didn't persist whereas Chinese ones did.

One way to think about the continuity of martial arts (or sports) is to consider the continuity of the institutions and social spaces that foster them.

• Pankration was a sport in the Olympic Games, and these stopped abruptly around 400 CE, abolished along with other practices that the Roman Empire(s), now with a new official state religion, considered pagan. They were already in decline before that.
• It was performed in various gladiatorial events, but these were also abolished for the same reason, or replaced by other spectacles.
• It was practised in gymnasiums, social spaces where people met, trained, gossiped, argued, flirted, and networked quite a lot - and then they'd scape all the mud off, put their clothes back on, and go about their businesses. These social spaces didn't survive late antiquity.
• Earlier, pankration was used in the military training of city-states that were gobbled up by the Roman Empire, and (AFAIK) it didn't get adopted by the Roman army, or any other.

So there was simply no institution or social space left to keep it going. It did last a thousand years though (even if we can't be sure how much it changed and evolved during that time).

Because we used guns more, we marginalized our warrior caste, and there's a big social difference between nations that progressed themselves (or only stole increments) and nations that adopted massive progress from others. The short of it is that those at the front of development tend to say 'bugger the past' whilst those who have technology thrust upon them strive to keep traditions.

Europeans largely ended nobility being a big deal 300-400 years ago, we don't care for tales of knights like the japanese care for samurai (who've only been gone for about 150 years) or the thai who had a king that gambled his country on a boxing match. So we're more distanced and we care less.

...I humbly suggest you don't use first person for things you didn't actually accomplish yourself, it tends to skew one's perspective.

[Brother Oni]

Heavier than most swords but lighter than the Jian?

I think you're fundamentally mis-understading something about maces.

Sword inflict their damage via a sharp edge or point, thus they can very light and still be effective weapons. Maces inflict their damage either via their mass or through armour defeating points/beaks - since the bar mace jian has neither of the latter features, it's reliant on mass.

You can't extend a one handed bar mace jian to near the length of a Tie Jian and still expect it to have the same shape, structural integrity and effectiveness without the associated weight. Physics simply doesn't work that way.

If you compromised on the shape and went for a western bar mace, you can achieve what you want; a longer weapon without excessive weight.

Spoiler: Western bar mace

Show

If you made your character inhumanly strong (strength/agility maxed out doesn't mean much if you don't state the game system), then you could potentially use a dan jian or dan bian with only one hand.

Edit: sorry, I mis-read the translation for the Dan Bian (it's comparable to the Dan Jian bar mace).

Europeans largely ended nobility being a big deal 300-400 years ago, we don't care for tales of knights like the japanese care for samurai (who've only been gone for about 150 years) or the thai who had a king that gambled his country on a boxing match. So we're more distanced and we care less.

The continual fixation on King Arthur, chivalry and Charlemagne will tend to disagree with you on that. There's also the British peerage system where the lowest rank is knight and still carries on to this day; meanwhile, all the samurai were effectively fired at the beginning of the Meiji period and the remnants of the Japanese peerage system was abolished in 1947.

While we're on the subject of unarmed martial arts:

What style of unarmed fighting goes better with what body type? If you'd prefer to narrow it down, pick a martial art or a body type and match it on the other end.

I find it's more mindset and personality that affects unarmed fighting preference; while a tall person may gravitate towards kicks and 'keep at a distance' fighting and a short person might like close range infighting, it's their personal preferences and learning opportunities that matter more.

As an example, I know of people of around my height (5'7") that much prefer evasive, stay at a distance fighting - I'm more of an in-fighter from both necessity (most people in my weight class are at least 4-5" taller than me) and personality.

One way to think about the continuity of martial arts (or sports) is to consider the continuity of the institutions and social spaces that foster them.

Thank you - I was thinking it was something along those lines, but didn't know how to articulate it without possibly over-emphasising the cultural tendency of continuing traditions in China and Japan.

[Shuruke]

I think you're fundamentally mis-understading something about maces.

Sword inflict their damage via a sharp edge or point, thus they can very light and still be effective weapons. Maces inflict their damage either via their mass or through armour defeating points/beaks - since the bar mace jian has neither of the latter features, it's reliant on mass.

You can't extend a one handed bar mace jian to near the length of a Tie Jian and still expect it to have the same shape, structural integrity and effectiveness without the associated weight. Physics simply doesn't work that way.

If you compromised on the shape and went for a western bar mace, you can achieve what you want; a longer weapon without excessive weight.

I'm not really misunderstanding I don't think
The Jian from my understanding was also capable of thrusts because of its point

All I am wondering is if it would be impossible to have it longer by about 12% -15%

This could probably be accomplished by making it slightly less thick

This could be done by instead of having the rod its built around being
Forte 21 mm
Middle 14 mm
Tip 10 mm
And 34 inches

All I am wondering is if
Forte 18 mm
Middle 11mm
Tip 7mm
And it being longer by a few inches

Would cause it to be unrealistic

Or in better words

Make a rapier blunt on the sides keeping its Sharpe point
Make it inches shorter
And 2 or 3 lbs heavier


If this is unrealistic ok that's all I was wondering I just dont completely understand topoc so am grasping at straws

The game would be 5e dnd
Character has 20 dex 20 str

[hymer]

I find it's more mindset and personality that affects unarmed fighting preference; while a tall person may gravitate towards kicks and 'keep at a distance' fighting and a short person might like close range infighting, it's their personal preferences and learning opportunities that matter more.

I don't doubt that you're right. But the question interests me all the same.

[gkathellar]

If we make it a mix if the two it'd be shorter than rapier and slightly lighter than breaker while retaining the shape of breaker for hitting wrists etc and allow agile use like rapier?

It wouldn't work the way you're hoping. A rapier works because it is pointy. It is a weapon specifically meant for poking holes in people's organs while keeping them at a distance with a strong guard. If you take away the point, it can't do its job.

That said, there are systems of fighting with agile blunt weapons - specifically, stick-fighting systems. In the right hands, single-stick is plenty dangerous, capable of striking hard and fast enough to snap bones. What's worth noting is that stick-fighting doesn't really depend on weight, but rather on good technique and kinetic linkage. In particular, the fingers are critical, as their coordinated movement can be much quicker than that of the elbow. For this sort of technique, a heavier stick only helps so long as the cost in speed and power is less than the benefit of that weight.

While we're on the subject of unarmed martial arts:

What style of unarmed fighting goes better with what body type? If you'd prefer to narrow it down, pick a martial art or a body type and match it on the other end.

That's a huge question, but one interesting refrain you'll hear in styles with low stances is that longer legs aren't necessarily better. Bigger people run into all sorts of square-cubed issues with managing their own weight, have naturally higher centers of gravity, and may not be able to rotate their waists as quickly as someone smaller. As a long-legged guy, I'll tell you that my stances are always higher than I want them to be, and it's a constant struggle to lower them. This is even true in styles that feature a lot of kicking (in more traditional forms of Tae Kwon Do, for instance), and can be true in weapon arts as well. Conversely, longer arms are almost always better, not just for offense but for defense as well.

I knew a smaller karate master with short arms and legs, superb in sparring, who depended a lot on hitting really hard and focusing on a mix of mind-games and the single-strike aesthetic of his style. One thing he liked to emphasize was that you should punish people for blocking or attacking by making the impacts hurt the opponent as much as possible. Wasn't really an in-fighter, but rather a hit-and-run alpha striker.

[Brother Oni]

This could be done by instead of having the rod its built around being
Forte 21 mm
Middle 14 mm
Tip 10 mm
And 34 inches

All I am wondering is if
Forte 18 mm
Middle 11mm
Tip 7mm
And it being longer by a few inches

Would cause it to be unrealistic

I assume those measurements are the radii?

Let's model the Jian bar mace as a uniform truncated cone (ignoring the hilt and the middle bulge for the sake of my sanity).

Spoiler: Original mace

Show

V = ((pi*h)/3))*(R² + Rr +r²)

Where h = 863.6 mm (34"), R = 21mm, r = 10mm.

This gives a volume of 679.2 cm³ and assuming it's made out of pure iron (8g/cm³), that makes it 5.4kg or 12.0lbs.

Spoiler: Proposed new maces

Show

Using h = 1066.8mm (42"), R=18mm, r=7mm

This gives a volume of 557cm³ and assuming the same material, 4.5kg or 9.8lbs


Using h = 1066.8mm (38"), R=18mm, r=7mm

This gives a volume of 504cm³ and assuming the same material, 4.0kg or 8.9lbs

So it's possible to make it longer and still seem reasonable, just not at the weight you want.

Backcalculating from your desired weight of 5lb, your length of 42" and keeping the dimensions in the same proportions gives me a mace of 12mm forte and 6mm tip. Calculating the tensile strength of an iron bar is a bit beyond my knowledge of physics, but it seems very thin for a combat weapon to me.

Bringing the length back down to 38", gives me a mace of 12mm forte and 7mm tip, so not much better.

The game would be 5e dnd
Character has 20 dex 20 str

DEX has no external yardstick, but 20 STR in 5th Ed equates to being able to bench 600lbs if I'm reading it correctly. Looking at people who can bench press 600lbs, you're not having a thin lithe character.

[Draconi Redfir]

not sure if applicable to this thread buuut... i can't think of anywhere else to put it other then the "mad science and grumpy technology" subforum and idk if it'd fit there either...

Do you think the Industrial Revolution could be possible without the (Internal?) Combustion Engine?

Want to try and make a game somewhere in the mid IR with things like very basic computers, wired communication, street-lights, printing press, and working gunpowder, but i don't want things like Cars and Trains to be around yet.

figure electricity could be generated through the old means of boiling water to form steam to spin a turbine. Not sure if that counts as an External combustion engine or not though.

[Shuruke]

It wouldn't work the way you're hoping. A rapier works because it is pointy. It is a weapon specifically meant for poking holes in people's organs while keeping them at a distance with a strong guard. If you take away the point, it can't do its job.

That said, there are systems of fighting with agile blunt weapons - specifically, stick-fighting systems. In the right hands, single-stick is plenty dangerous, capable of striking hard and fast enough to snap bones. What's worth noting is that stick-fighting doesn't really depend on weight, but rather on good technique and kinetic linkage. In particular, the fingers are critical, as their coordinated movement can be much quicker than that of the elbow. For this sort of technique, a heavier stick only helps so long as the cost in speed and power is less than the benefit of that weight.
.

I understand the rapier works because it is pointy

Im not sure if I'm just not being clear or what's going on

But to make it very simple

What I have in mind would

1. Be made from a square bar like thing with that's edges aren't meant for cutting

2. Itd be thicker than a rapier but thinner than jian

3. Would be either same weight as jian despite being thinner due to being few inches longer. Or slightly lighter

4. Would come to a point like any stabby thing.

Googling rapier (I know this may not be accurate but that's why I'm here)
It says roughly 2.2 lbs and 41 inches
The Jian had said 5.3 at 34 inches

So is their any realistic way to find the halfway point between the maneuverability of rapier , being blunt along blade as it comes to point
And heavier while being shorter

[gkathellar]

not sure if applicable to this thread buuut... i can't think of anywhere else to put it other then the "mad science and grumpy technology" subforum and idk if it'd fit there either...

Do you think the Industrial Revolution could be possible without the (Internal?) Combustion Engine?

Want to try and make a game somewhere in the mid IR with things like very basic computers, wired communication, street-lights, printing press, and working gunpowder, but i don't want things like Cars and Trains to be around yet.

figure electricity could be generated through the old means of boiling water to form steam to spin a turbine. Not sure if that counts as an External combustion engine or not though.

The industrial revolution wasn't brought about by the internal combustion engine. It was brought about by vastly improved efficiency in coal-fired steam power, arguably because of weird historical circumstances involving the need for more efficient pumps to get access to underwater coal for use in heating people's homes. Steam power had been a known quantity for thousands of years, but it was generally not cost-effective. However, steam-powered pumps using coal that was already on site made sense, and as engineers made improvements to the pumps, they gradually developed steam power efficient enough to actually do things.

Virtually all non-solar power today is generated by turbines, usually via some variation on steam. Oil, coal, natural gas, and nuclear power all work on the principle of "get water hot enough to spin a turbine." So, yes, in the absence of the internal combustion engine (perhaps because of a lack of viable fuel?), most modern tech would still be possible. However, if you have turbines, you're almost certainly going to have steam locomotives. Them's the breaks.

[Brother Oni]

Googling rapier (I know this may not be accurate but that's why I'm here)
It says roughly 2.2 lbs and 41 inches
The Jian had said 5.3 at 34 inches

So is their any realistic way to find the halfway point between the maneuverability of rapier , being blunt along blade as it comes to point
And heavier while being shorter

In my opinion, not while retaining a reasonable thickness circular cross-section and your required weight for one handed use. Change the shape of the mace 'blade' and you can.

[Shuruke]

In my opinion, not while retaining a reasonable thickness circular cross-section and your required weight for one handed use. Change the shape of the mace 'blade' and you can.

Okay thanks ^.^ not trying to sound mean or anything I was just really confused on how what I kept saying kept getting interpretated weirdly.

So would it be better for it to be cylinder blade coming to a point? Kinda like a heavier cavalier rapier ?

[The Jack]

...I humbly suggest you don't use first person for things you didn't actually accomplish yourself, it tends to skew one's perspective.

The bigger problem is the ambiguity.

I don't use 'we' for accomplishment, I use 'we' for mindset.
I've moved around a lot in my life so I don't comfortably think of myself as belonging to any particular nation or cultural group.
I am however, future thinking. Part of a long tradition of people who question tradition. It's not wrong to use 'we' when thinking of like-minded people, people in your profession or hobby, or as part of a general movement.

I
The continual fixation on King Arthur, chivalry and Charlemagne will tend to disagree with you on that. There's also the British peerage system where the lowest rank is knight and still carries on to this day; meanwhile, all the samurai were effectively fired at the beginning of the Meiji period and the remnants of the Japanese peerage system was abolished in 1947.

.

A very, very tiny minority of... Britain, as I can't speak for europe, know what the hell went on with king arthur. We don't know the difference between the swords, we don't know who was on the round table, and the movies all suck ass. The average brit thinks the whole thing is humorously pompous, the best known bit is that lancelot cucked his king. King arthur's stuff's more parodied than seriously thought of; Monty Python and the wholy grail is the definitive take on the Arthurian mythos for a lot of us. Britons aren't going to be interested in HEMA from Arthur, generations have given us the conclusion that he's silly, whilst Asian veneration of historical/mythological figures is more genuine and conductive to an interest in marital arts.

as for Charlemagne... the dude's completely unknown by a lot of Europeans (probably everyone he didn't conquer).
Maybe you're hanging around the special circles (this is a DnD forum) but I don't think the average person's very into that part of history/mythology.
Something I've noticed is that Americans, Asians and Australians have an interest in areas of medieval Europe/myth that europeans don't. I'm sure people in the new worlds pine for a vivid past of their cultural roots as their own country's young, but most europeans don't look past their history classes.

As my Indian friends have put it; "Indian food, or as I call it; food" and 'temples are for tourists" (Well, that's their young-modern attitude, they've clarified that some people take it seriously)
Some things are more interesting for outsiders than they are for natives.

[Storm_Of_Snow]

not sure if applicable to this thread buuut... i can't think of anywhere else to put it other then the "mad science and grumpy technology" subforum and idk if it'd fit there either...

Do you think the Industrial Revolution could be possible without the (Internal?) Combustion Engine?

Want to try and make a game somewhere in the mid IR with things like very basic computers, wired communication, street-lights, printing press, and working gunpowder, but i don't want things like Cars and Trains to be around yet.

figure electricity could be generated through the old means of boiling water to form steam to spin a turbine. Not sure if that counts as an External combustion engine or not though.

As gkathellar said, the Industrial Revolution was brought about by steam power, not the ICE - we're really talking the mid-18th to early 19th centuries, and the ICE isn't really around until the 1820s, and only becomes viable by the late 19th century.

For the things you mention, some things are already there - there's coal gas for street lighting, plenty of gunpowder (the period basically ends with the end of the Napoleonic Wars) and the printing press is old hat. A working computer's more tricky - you could potentially have a small, pre-Babbage mechanical calculator, but nothing electronic (the materials science isn't really up to it at the time), and an electrical telegraph's equally unlikely, which means you're into signal telegraphs (what The Clacks in the Discworld noves was based on).

Another thing to remember for that mid-Revolution period is that you're pretty much in the middle of the French Revolution as well - given science and learning in that era was mainly in the realms of the nobility, there's likely French scientists who've emigrated (with varying distances ahead of the mob, which may mean they've had to abandon their work), and some who had terminal meetings with Madame Guillotine. And with the American War of Independence, the Seven Years war, skirmishes and outright conflict in the European colonies (India especially) and the Napoleonic Wars, you've got at least some of the scientists and engineers more focussed on military improvements than civilian ones.

[Draconi Redfir]

The industrial revolution wasn't brought about by the internal combustion engine. It was brought about by vastly improved efficiency in coal-fired steam power, arguably because of weird historical circumstances involving the need for more efficient pumps to get access to underwater coal for use in heating people's homes. Steam power had been a known quantity for thousands of years, but it was generally not cost-effective. However, steam-powered pumps using coal that was already on site made sense, and as engineers made improvements to the pumps, they gradually developed steam power efficient enough to actually do things.

Virtually all non-solar power today is generated by turbines, usually via some variation on steam. Oil, coal, natural gas, and nuclear power all work on the principle of "get water hot enough to spin a turbine." So, yes, in the absence of the internal combustion engine (perhaps because of a lack of viable fuel?), most modern tech would still be possible. However, if you have turbines, you're almost certainly going to have steam locomotives. Them's the breaks.

As gkathellar said, the Industrial Revolution was brought about by steam power, not the ICE - we're really talking the mid-18th to early 19th centuries, and the ICE isn't really around until the 1820s, and only becomes viable by the late 19th century.

For the things you mention, some things are already there - there's coal gas for street lighting, plenty of gunpowder (the period basically ends with the end of the Napoleonic Wars) and the printing press is old hat. A working computer's more tricky - you could potentially have a small, pre-Babbage mechanical calculator, but nothing electronic (the materials science isn't really up to it at the time), and an electrical telegraph's equally unlikely, which means you're into signal telegraphs (what The Clacks in the Discworld noves was based on).

Another thing to remember for that mid-Revolution period is that you're pretty much in the middle of the French Revolution as well - given science and learning in that era was mainly in the realms of the nobility, there's likely French scientists who've emigrated (with varying distances ahead of the mob, which may mean they've had to abandon their work), and some who had terminal meetings with Madame Guillotine. And with the American War of Independence, the Seven Years war, skirmishes and outright conflict in the European colonies (India especially) and the Napoleonic Wars, you've got at least some of the scientists and engineers more focussed on military improvements than civilian ones.

Sounds like a lack of ICE shouldn't be that big of a problem at all then, good to know. Thanks!

[Brother Oni]

Okay thanks ^.^ not trying to sound mean or anything I was just really confused on how what I kept saying kept getting interpretated weirdly.

So would it be better for it to be cylinder blade coming to a point? Kinda like a heavier cavalier rapier ?

The point I was trying to make, is that for what you want (a long, light blade that's still strong), a solid cylinder is one of the worst shapes possible, since it has a high volume to length ratio - that's just mathematics.

For example, if you look at the differences between the 5lb weight maces, there's hardly any gain in effective thickness, despite the 4" difference in blade length.

Boiling it down, if you want to keep weapon effectiveness, pick any two of: cylinder shaped blade; light; long.
You want a light and long blade, it can't be cylinder shaped. You want a long cylinder blade, it can't be light. You want a light cylinder blade, it can't be long.

In my opinion, the optimal shape for what you want is either an European bar mace or a steel I-Beam shaped mace.

[Storm Bringer]

I'm curious: Can someone answer me why eastern Asia seems to have a much stronger traditional of unarmed combat styles than other parts of the world?

I believe that one part of it is the (relative) stability of the major Asian nations meant their was less drive to innovate, and in particular less need to use firearms. Don't get me wrong, they had firearms, but they stayed in the matchlock era for at something like 150-200 years longer than everyone else (my understanding is that the Chinese troops in the Opium Wars were armed with matchlocks, in the mid 1800s, whereas their British opponents had pushed matchlocks to second line roles by 1700 or so), and thus stayed in the era where determined troops could and did force their way into melee range, and thus melee skills were still a primary consideration.

this "Asian stasis" effect, combined with the religious elements of their practice, helped to preserve their local marital art styles in a way that the cut-throat innovation and competition of the western world didn't.

The ubiquity of firearms by the mid 17th century, along with the switch to mass "quantity" army instead of the medieval "quality" army, led to a decline in wester martial arts as they stopped being practical methods of defence and became more of a rich mans hobby.


Also, theirs a element of "whats our isn't special" going on, by which I mean the practical, effective martial arts that still survived in some from in the western world, like boxing, fencing and wrestling, are often overlooked or written off as primitive, because they lack the exotic, "Eastern" semi-religious methodology with its path to enlightenment, clearly defined rank structure etc.

Then you get into the MMA style stuff with a lot of the core moves being present with cosmetic differences in styles form Latin America, western Europe and the East, simply, because the mechanics and physics of unarmed combat remain the same, and theirs only so many ways you can throw a punch or sweep a leg.

[Shuruke]

The point I was trying to make, is that for what you want (a long, light blade that's still strong), a solid cylinder is one of the worst shapes possible, since it has a high volume to length ratio - that's just mathematics.

For example, if you look at the differences between the 5lb weight maces, there's hardly any gain in effective thickness, despite the 4" difference in blade length.

Boiling it down, if you want to keep weapon effectiveness, pick any two of: cylinder shaped blade; light; long.
You want a light and long blade, it can't be cylinder shaped. You want a long cylinder blade, it can't be light. You want a light cylinder blade, it can't be long.

In my opinion, the optimal shape for what you want is either an European bar mace or a steel I-Beam shaped mace.

I'm still confused

So the typical rectangle shape of jian with a sharper tip wont work

And a like 1/2 diameter cylinder blade blade with sharp tip won't work

Then how would an x make anymore sense?

I'm just gonna admit defeat and say **** it its fantasy rpg cuz I just don't see the logic behind a 38-40 inch sword that has a rectangle blunt blade coming to a Sharp point not maling sense with physics