[Low-Tech] Material or quality

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Anders

Dan, as one of the authors of Low-Tech, can you tell us something about the original question?

I don't know. I had so much on my plate that I didn't even read most of the rest of the book until the playtest was over.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

There is no such thing as a sword "evolution". The kinds of swords used on the battlefield have changed very little for thousands of years. No sword can cut through armour and the only sword that can stab through armour are specialised weapons such as the estoc/tuck. Whether armour was common or not had little influence over which swords were chosen by soldiers. If you chose a sword to fight someone in armour then you were likely to lose. Polearms were king on the battlefield. A sword is just a sidearm, like a pistol in modern warfare.

So you're saying that a broadsword (what we fairly normal roleplayers understand as a broadsword) is as useless against an armoured foe as a rapier (what we fairly normal roleplayers understand as a rapier) is?

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Nah, there's probably some metallurgy issues involved (not that easy to make a long thin stabby thing that doesn't just break),

Yup. No rapiers in my 10th century Ärth setting. Some places actually have the metallurgy to make them (the equivalent of GURPS' TL4 in metallurgy and smithing, sometimes even TL5) but it hasn't happened yet.

That's also why their presence bothers me in D&D and in GURPS Dungeon Fantasy. I don't think metallurgy was contemplated. I don't think anybody remembered to ask "hey, can a medieval smith do a rapier?"

[Flyndaran]

D&D has the armor and metallurgy of TL 4-5, government of European TL 2-3, etc.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

So you're saying that a broadsword (what we fairly normal roleplayers understand as a broadsword) is as useless against an armoured foe as a rapier (what we fairly normal roleplayers understand as a rapier) is?

There are plenty of ways to take out an armoured foe with a sword. It is just that none of them involve cutting or punching through the armour.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

That's also why their presence bothers me in D&D and in GURPS Dungeon Fantasy. I don't think metallurgy was contemplated. I don't think anybody remembered to ask "hey, can a medieval smith do a rapier?"

The best La Tene Celt smiths could do a rapier. We have extant examples of their swords with the required metallurgy. There is at least one that can still be flexed almost double and spring back straight even though it is over two thousand years old.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

That's also why their presence bothers me in D&D and in GURPS Dungeon Fantasy. I don't think metallurgy was contemplated. I don't think anybody remembered to ask "hey, can a medieval smith do a rapier?"

Dungeon Fantasy is not particularly concerned with historical accuracy...

Originally Posted by DanHoward

I don't know. I had so much on my plate that I didn't even read most of the rest of the book until the playtest was over.

I thought you were in charge of weapons and armor? Ah, well...

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Anders

I thought you were in charge of weapons and armor? Ah, well...

I wrote chapters 6. Defenses and 7. Security & Covert Ops. Peter wrote Chapter 5. Weapons.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

That's also why their presence bothers me in D&D and in GURPS Dungeon Fantasy. I don't think metallurgy was contemplated. I don't think anybody remembered to ask "hey, can a medieval smith do a rapier?"

Of course not. What they asked was "Will anyone want to play a Buckleswasher?"

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Of course not. What they asked was "Will anyone want to play a Buckleswasher?"

Who would ever play one that left his swash unbuckled? That's scandalous.