07-11-2016, 06:44 PM | #51 |
Join Date: Jul 2016
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Well, now you have gone and made me less certain. Are you saying that GURPS is not accurate by giving a damage bonus, even a minimal one, for a ST 10 person vs a ST 12 person for wielding a "bastard sword" against an unarmored human target?
|
07-11-2016, 06:51 PM | #52 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison |
|
07-11-2016, 09:48 PM | #53 | |
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vermont
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
I study unarmed martial artsts (including unarmed HEMA) as well as sword-fighting and I can tell you, without hestation, that I can win a swordfight against a much stronger opponent if I'm just a little more skilled. But I'd need to be a lot more skilled to win a boxing match against a stronger opponent and even more skilled to win a wrestling match against a stronger opponent. You do need strength to use a weapon correctly, and there are ways to use superior strength to you advantage, but in many ways, weapons are a great equalizer.
__________________
My ongoing thread of GURPS versions of DC Comics characters. |
|
07-11-2016, 10:47 PM | #54 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Fencing, which uses very very light weapons, is at the extreme end of the situation.
|
07-11-2016, 11:11 PM | #55 | |
Join Date: Sep 2011
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
While it may not directly correlate to melee weapons, one summer, many, many years ago, I had to help shingle the roof and went from about as bad as can be at it to fairly decent at it before the job was done. (I doubt I could do it now.) The point here is that when I just swung the hammer with all my might, I got everything and anything but a properly driven nail, anything from a bent nail to a bruised thumbnail. Once I was shown the proper technique and got it down, I didn’t need to swing the hammer particularly hard or fast. What I did have to do was line up my arc so the bell of the hammer face landed squarely on the head of the nail. The result was a nail driven in straight, nail head flush with the shingle, in one blow, every time. I think that’s the point they’re making. For a swung mace, it may be a better analogy to think of its strike as trying to drive a nail with a carpenter’s hammer rather than trying to hit a line drive with a baseball bat. |
|
07-11-2016, 11:57 PM | #56 | |
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
The question here is whether ST should matter in GURPS when it comes to swordplay. The primary places it matters are in minimum ST, beats and damage. The experts seem to acknowledge the need for minimum ST, and if I'm honest, I doubt modern sword-experts are really that concerned about damage. They don't need to slice arms off for a living. I expect in reality, when it comes to actual damage, physical strength makes a difference. I'm not saying GURPS is perfect, but the idea that ST "doesn't matter" strikes me as nonsense. It does matter! But clearly skill matters more, and GURPS doesn't disagree with that.
__________________
My Blog: Mailanka's Musing. Currently Playing: Psi-Wars, a step-by-step exploration of building your own Space Opera setting, inspired by Star Wars. |
|
07-12-2016, 12:06 AM | #57 |
Join Date: Jul 2016
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
I don't think anyone is seriously advancing the first position. The question all along simply has been "ok, it matters, but how much?'. And I've gotten a lot of answers here (thanks again).
|
07-12-2016, 01:54 AM | #58 | |
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
But here, I think I perfectly understand what you wanted to mean. I just don't agree. I think the ratio skill/ST may be about the same in karate than in swordplay. Swordsman may have less muscle training exercise (I don't know), they always fight with their sword, which is a weight. So, every time they train, they do muscle building exercises. After 30 minutes of sai or tonkwa handling, my wrists hurt. |
|
07-12-2016, 02:08 AM | #59 |
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
And we often forgot that the aged master is not an ordinary old man. He is a man who did a lot of muscle training exercises and who probably go on doing some, to maintain his fitness as much as possible. My sensei is 67 years old. He remains far much stronger than I am, and probably much stronger than every young and strong karateka in my dojo. I've seen him show how to lift heavy weight more quickly by using abdominal contraction.
|
07-12-2016, 02:24 AM | #60 | |
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
If she was skilled, she would know how to use footing, hip rotation and abdominal contraction to lock your thumb or even your arm much more effectively. That is what make member locks far much faster and stronger (and so painful for the victim: properly done, it breaks joints) ... But if she was skilled, she would also be stronger. It's the snake that bites its own tail. |
|
Tags |
combat, hema |
|
|