Difference between Greatsword/Thrusting Greatsword

[Boberama]

Maybe these?
http://www.artfund.org/assets/image/...arged/1253.jpg
http://www.weapons-universe.com/Swor...ners_Sword.jpg

and check the second sword from the bottom:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...seum_Basel.JPG

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Bruno

All the scissors I have are very sharp at the end.

I never said scissors shouldn't do Impaling damage. They definitely should. There's no question that you can stab people with them.

The issue is about whether or not there's some historical metal sword that's as blunt as a bokken. That's _really_ blunt and you can't stab people with a bokken.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Boberama

Maybe these?
http://www.artfund.org/assets/image/...arged/1253.jpg
http://www.weapons-universe.com/Swor...ners_Sword.jpg

and check the second sword from the bottom:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...seum_Basel.JPG

It'd be easier to tell if you posted the links to the page before these. Bare images can be misleading.

Even with nothing but the url titles one of these appears to be an "Executioner's sword'. That might well qualify as a "sword-shaped object" for all but its' intended purpose rather than a "real" weapon.

In any event it's not so much the profile along the length that we need but the tip and particularly it's cross-section.

Go back to the Mensurshlager I linked to....

http://hoeglund.org/vapen/sablar/Mensur1921.htm

.....no doubt it's sports equipment rather than a real weapon but I suspect that even though the tip is perfectly squared off the blade is so thin that it would be at least as dangerous as a screwdriver in a thrust. It's definitely not as blunt as a bokken.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

It'd be easier to tell if you posted the links to the page before these. Bare images can be misleading.

Even with nothing but the url titles one of these appears to be an "Executioner's sword'. That might well qualify as a "sword-shaped object" for all but its' intended purpose rather than a "real" weapon.

And yet, there it is, blunt, and a sword.

I'm a little confused because you seem sort of definitely arguing for something, and I have no idea what.

Are you arguing that all swords are impaling and its physically impossible to make a blunt one? A bokken is very very blunt, but that doesn't make it the only possible configuration for a blunt object. See the flanges or spikes on a mace, which certainly don't do impaling or cutting damage, they only give +1 damage (crushing).

A screwdriver is also VERY narrow in two different dimensions when compared to every non-fencing sword. Absolute width and thickness matters in GURPS damage types, not just aspect ratio and shape.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Bruno

And yet, there it is, blunt, and a sword.

I'm a little confused because you seem sort of definitely arguing for something, and I have no idea what.

I am arguing that what Gurps calls a "normal" Broadsword, etc. is extremely rare, verging on non-existent and not at all the "norm".

It is the Thrusting Broadsword that is the norm.

That clear enough for you?

[safisher]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

It is the Thrusting Broadsword that is the norm.

That's essentially what I said, Fred. I think you just like to argue.

Further, in a contest between GURPS game mechanics and real descriptions, we must first defer to the published GURPS stats in Basic Set, not real life appearances. GURPS defines blunt-tipped swords and gives stats for blunt swords. Further, there's a whole section on training weapons in which gives us Martial Arts stats for unsharpened but good-quality "blunt" weapons: they do crushing damage. Problem solved.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

That clear enough for you?

Ah. So the only part you don't like is the names assigned. They probably could have swapped it out and have the unmodified sword names be the pointy ones, and the others be "blunt" (or even a modifier to blunt it - my preference, saves wordcount ).

But they didn't 4 editions ago, and I think by now the names are pretty permanent. Like "Honesty" ;)

[sir_pudding]

"Spade-blades" of the type that safisher linked to aren't all that uncommon. It is for example a common point style for late medieval Irish swords.

[aesir23]

I could see calling "spade blades" thrust Cutting instead of impaling, but they're not crushing by any means.

[DanHoward]

All swords should deliver impaling damage when thrusted. The "spade" blades might get a -1 to imp. There is precdedent for this such as the previously mentioned scissors in MA.

A Roman Gladius, I believe, would be considered a blunt broadsword

I have had a hard enough time here just trying to convince people that the Romans cut with them at all. Most people consider the gladius to be a "thrust only"" sword. And they are shortswords not broadswords. "Spatha" is usually the term given to any Roman sword that is longer than a shortsword. It is as meaningless as the term "broadsword"