07-11-2016, 04:46 PM | #41 | |
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs2NnBumiWI |
|
07-11-2016, 04:49 PM | #42 |
Join Date: Jul 2016
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Ok, I'm definitely becoming convinced that comparing ST 7 vs ST 13 is not the best comparison.
I'm also becoming more sold on the proposition that if there is any truth that general strength is not important in a swordsman, it's because the HEMA people are talking in the context of no armor, against real opponents, where any significant cut is going to incapacitate, which probably is not applicable to a dungeon fantasy of monsters with extraordinarily thick hides, full plate, and super strength (whether supernatural or merely from being ridiculously big i.e. dragons). Again, thanks all. Last edited by Gerrard of Titan Server; 07-11-2016 at 04:50 PM. Reason: just after post, clarity, adding example |
07-11-2016, 05:07 PM | #43 |
formerly known as 'Kenneth Latrans'
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wyoming, Michigan
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Nothing was saying skill wasn't important for unarmed fighting, only that the proportional relevance of strength compared to skill favors strength more in unarmed combat than it does with swordplay just as it favors skill even more than strength in gunplay than it does in swordplay.
__________________
Ba-weep granah wheep minibon. Wubba lubba dub dub. |
07-11-2016, 05:11 PM | #44 | |
Untagged
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check. |
|
07-11-2016, 05:14 PM | #45 | |
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
This is true in reality, and this is true in GURPS. Have you seen the Game of Thrones TV series (the combat between The Mountain and The Viper)? Even if it is fiction, and somehow cinematic, it perfectly illustrate that: the Viper needs a lot of attacks where the Mountain only needs a few ones (if not just one). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM9wWtHozCM (Warning: violence - for informed audience only). At any rate, thank you for this very interesting thread. Last edited by Gollum; 07-11-2016 at 05:53 PM. |
|
07-11-2016, 05:51 PM | #46 | |
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
Having said that, I'm not at all experienced with swords. The only weapon I know (a bit) are bo (quartterstaff), saļ and tonkwa (okinawaian wooden tonfa). And (fortunately!) I never take part in a life or death combat ... So, it is just a feeling. |
|
07-11-2016, 05:57 PM | #47 | |
formerly known as 'Kenneth Latrans'
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wyoming, Michigan
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Quote:
Saying unarmed combat favors strength proportionally to skill more than armed combat does does not mean that skill isn't more important than strength there. It could be the difference between a 6:4 favoring of skill over strength against a 7:3 split or an 8.5:1.5 vs 9:1.
__________________
Ba-weep granah wheep minibon. Wubba lubba dub dub. |
|
07-11-2016, 06:06 PM | #48 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
As I recall my instructors used to say something along the lines of "All other factors being equal the stronger guy wins. We'll work on making the other factors unequal after you can't do any more pushups..." It wasn't an all or nothing equation. Do you need to be strong to wield a longsword? No. Do you want to be strong if you have to do so against someone who wants to hurt you? Yes.
I will also point out that in our school transitioning from sword (or other weapons) to grappling (armed or otherwise) and back was the norm. So any comments about wanting strength for unarmed combat certainly applied to how we interpreted the manuals. |
07-11-2016, 06:29 PM | #49 |
Untagged
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
Strength certainly matters, but I don't see it as mattering anywhere near as much between skilled oponents as between two people smacking like uneducate apes.
My lady once slammed her forehead against my nose, and she said, "ouch", while I just laughed. When she tried a minor thumb lock, she couldn't exert enough force with her whole hand to overcome my single digit strength. But I don't doubt for a minute that if she had even a tiny bit of combat skill, she could mop the floor with me. People are tough only if you don't know where all our vulnerable spots are and/or know how to accurately impact them. Sharp pieces of metal kill people and having muscles 20-40% thicker than weak Willy's are well below the margin of error for any reasonable metric, in my opinion.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check. |
07-11-2016, 06:33 PM | #50 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)
It is, however, an all or nothing headline. Realistically, strength is important but it's certainly not the only thing that matters; the aged master who beats the strong but unskilled youth is a real thing, but it involves an enormous skill disparity.
|
Tags |
combat, hema |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|