When Choosing the Better Weapon

[Manhattan]

1. an obsidian sword -
This sword is about three-cords long and made of obsidian.

2. a fire-darkened, razor-edged gladius of tough baobab -
This stout sword is finely-honed along the sides, the blade flattening out to make a sharp cutting edge. The entire sword was blasted in the fire ovens for sturdiness. A series of overlapping, elegant wood depicting threading vines makes up the hand-guard, completely enveloping the hand of the wielder. Finishing off the solid grip is a hilt bounded tightly with clean-cut strips of tanned carru leather. The leather wrappings have been brushed over with a lustrous oil causing the smooth surface of the hilt to refract stray light. A wheel complete with seventeen spokes of the rays of Suk-Krath is engraved in the entirety of the spherical pommel, the thick weight counterbalancing the rest of the sword. Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla...


Read this only after you've voted:
In reality, the stone longsword far outweighs the wimpy wooden bread-slicer in strength and toughness. But if you came across these two swords in game, and looked at their conflicting lengths in description, what do you as a player think is the better sword?  Would the weapon with the lengthier and more thought-out description rule supreme? Or would the shitty one-liner find its way into your PC's hands?

[Synthesis]

The first, only because items that have such lame descriptions are usually remnants of the hack and slash days, and may still have buggy uber stats, bwahaha.

[Jherlen]

While Sword One may -appear- better, Sword Two looks cool and undoubtedly costs more because of this. Everyone knows that more expensive = nicer, so pick Sword Two and support your local weapons merchants.

[Ghost]

I hate wooden weapons.  So there is no way I am going to get the second one.  Unless it is magickal.  Well, magickal and that I could benefit from its magick.

[Demonaire]

Where is the option for, "Whichever makes me happy at the time."

In seriousness, it would depend on what style of weaponry my current character enjoyed using. Then, it would depend on whether or not he/she likes wood, bone or any other materials. Generally, the sdesc comes last when I'm looking to purchase something IG.


- Demonaire

[Larrath]

If I wanted a sword for my Bynner Trooper mercenary, I'd pick the obsidian sword.
If I wanted a decorative sword for my army-leading noble, I'd pick the wooden sword.

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

OMGZ obzideean ftw!
But seriously... my response is pretty much the same as Demonaire's. Although I will add that I OOCly prefer weapons and clothing with simple sdescs, since they looker better when used in an EMOTE.

[Hexxaex]

I go for the obisidian sword, for all practical purposes.  Obsidian is the sharpest weapon-making material in the game, and wood is probably the worst.

The first sword is great for actually fighting people, because of its simplicity and sharpness.

The second is perfect just as decoration.  Because of its design, it might show a lot of Tuluk spirit, being made of wood and having the decorations that it does.  I would expect to see that kind of sword on a noble or templar as a decorational or ceremonial object.

[Marauder Moe]

Depends on what I'm fighting.  For soft, unarmored targets (ie people) the obsidian sword would probably be a little better.  For things with hard shells, obsidian is a bit too brittle.

[Yokunama]

Where is the option for, "Whichever makes me happy at the time."

In seriousness, it would depend on what style of weaponry my current character enjoyed using. Then, it would depend on whether or not he/she likes wood, bone or any other materials. Generally, the sdesc comes last when I'm looking to purchase something IG.


- Demonaire

Agreed, you do not need 'the firey sword of doom' to put a gith to sleep.

[Maybe42or54]

Am I from Tuluk? Or Allanak?

If I am from Tuluk, I am going to pick the flowery sword.
If I am from Allanak, I'd pick the obsidian one.


If I I live in the real world, I am going to skip both and go with a club.

[Hexxaex]

If I I live in the real world, I am going to skip both and go with a club.

In the middle ages, when suits of metal armor were put on soldiers, cutting and piercing weapons were ineffective.  That's when crushing weapons like flails and clubs were used, so instead of trying to pierce through a metal breastplate, you can just smack the guy in the head with an iron ball.

Bludgeoning weapons in Armageddon are probably more practical when you're fighting things like gurth with a shell.  Also, if you're killing the animals for their skins, do you really want to riddle it with holes and slash-marks?  A club or mace would only break a few bones, but leave the skin or pelt bruised, instead of ripped.

[Bogre]

I don't think many people could afford the second sword, especially in the south, wood being so rare and all.

[jstorrie]

I think obsidian longswords are stupid, given the low tensile strength of obsidian, so I would choose the little wooden thing.

But really I'd choose neither and go get a good spear, club or bow. Low-tech ftw!

[Larrath]

If I I live in the real world, I am going to skip both and go with a club.

In the middle ages, when suits of metal armor were put on soldiers, cutting and piercing weapons were ineffective.  That's when crushing weapons like flails and clubs were used, so instead of trying to pierce through a metal breastplate, you can just smack the guy in the head with an iron ball.

Bludgeoning weapons in Armageddon are probably more practical when you're fighting things like gurth with a shell.  Also, if you're killing the animals for their skins, do you really want to riddle it with holes and slash-marks?  A club or mace would only break a few bones, but leave the skin or pelt bruised, instead of ripped.

Then again, most bladed weapons in Zalanthas don't cut nearly as well as our steel weapons did at the time.  Even the sharper-than-metal obsidian swords can't keep their edge for that long, and thus it's probably possible to, say, use your forearm to stop a human (though not a dwarf) who slashed at your neck and eventually heal fully back, naturally.

So the difference between a good spiked mace and a longsword isn't all that huge when a naked suckling babe is concerned.

[Anonymous]

Ahem, forgetting spears?
Spears are the weapon that was the bane of armored knights (excluding the crossbow OF COURSE)
because a spear acts like a lever in your hands; giving mechanical advantage  that is unparrelled.  Physics

a spear in your hands is a first-class lever right?
which means up to 5 times a force multiplier right (In a reasonable length of spear)?

lets say our spear has a wide one inch kinda pointy head (imagine the steeple of a church if you have to)
pressure=force/area

lets say your char is of average strength....
only exerting about 125lbs of force

insert easy math
100/1=100

100psi
hmm? aren't we forgeting the leverage added by a the spear?
125x5=625.
thats kin to the PSI of a large cat (as in Lion or Jaguar)
scary eh?
now what if that point was 1/2 inch?
625x2=1250psi
.25 inch?
1250x2=2500psi
Think bout that for a minute....

FEAR a SPEAR!


Now as for obsidian weapons? heh....If you had a sword made out of obsidian...perfectly formed (as in a center piece that cooled correctly).
and it was pressure flaked correctly, you would have a sword sharp as a scalpel and with enough mass behind it to make a hatchet look like a sissy. Now a few things to take into reason...

1.yes obsidian is glass. It fractures in a pattern based on the impurities in the glass.
2.Although heavy it is lighter than steel.
3.Obsidian swords were used by mesoamericans*although they had wooden hafts)

wooden weapons are STUPID!
Its a fancy shaped CLUB for Chirst-sake!

and a note about clubs, Specifically hammers: they are 1st class levers also but would you rather have a four foot hammer or a ten-foot spear in a massive force on force?

[Spoon]

Hammer. Spears get STUCK in people.

[joyofdiscord]

I'd have to go with the spear as well.  It'll only get stuck if it has a barbed head.  If it's just a glorified pointy stick, it'll come back out without any trouble.  Hammers have to have a backswing before you can build up enough force to hit with them, so I think the time between blows would be comparable between a hammer and a spear, and while you're pulling the spear out of your enemy's gut, it's still out there in front of you providing some measure of defense.  You have to swing a hammer 'round behind you.

This is all from someone VERY ignorant in actual RL applications of weapons.  I just know a spear is the best choice for a human looking to take down a lion or such.

[Dalmeth]

Swords are one of the most flexible and easy to use weapons for when you want to kill a human.  Spears aren't so bad either, but their hafts make them a bit troublesome if the enemy gets into close quarters, so that requires a bit more skill.

Spears are probably the best for taking down animals as far as melee weapons go, as it keeps an animal's usually very-short range attacks away from you, forcing them to lunge at you.  You can generally injure an animal as it approaches with a little skill.  The best weapon, though, is to stay the hell away with a bow or somesuch.

Axes are like maces, except generally lighter.  A really small mace head might be more useful than a really small axe-head, but generally the aforementioned relationship stands.  If you want to cut into something, but don't want to be too heavy, an axe is the way to go.  They, like spears, generally focus their force onto one point of the blade, making for a rather nasty hit.

Maces have a few advantages, like being dummy-proof.  Most weapons, like swords, spears, and even axes, can be occasionally turned aside with they don't hit hard armor at an exactly perpendicular angle.  Maces don't tend to suffer from the problem.  Another point about maces and other weapons that are generally considered blunt, is that they usually have spikes of some sort (or pointed edges) that add a good deal of penetration to their blows.

[JollyGreenGiant]

"Magick is impressive.  But now, Minsc leads!  Swords for everyone!"

[Lohan]

Swords are one of the most flexible and easy to use weapons for when you want to kill a human. Spears aren't so bad either, but their hafts make them a bit troublesome if the enemy gets into close quarters, so that requires a bit more skill.

Very true, the spear's range is a bit of a hassle in tight situation.

This is all from someone VERY ignorant in actual RL applications of weapons. I just know a spear is the best choice for a human looking to take down a lion or such.

You aren't ignorant at all Joyofdiscord. The part about Lion though applies to any attacker.

Hammer. Spears get STUCK in people.

Diffrent strokes I guess, But spears that would be used to kill someone would have a cross piece to minimize overpentration. and to double as a shield hook. You drop your spear over someone's shield, hook it pulling back hard to open a slot and jab REALLY hard. Some Dark Ages warhammers had this feature as well.

Swords are one of the most flexible and easy to use weapons for when you want to kill a human.

Flexible, yes. Easy to use, yes with somethings that need to be known. But how come armies that conqured the world used spears as their main weapon? Because a greater margin of error can be had with a spear and you can survive. Why is there Olympic Fencing? Because SKILL is such a great differentiator in combat with a sword. the same can be said with spears, But having some personal expirences as far as livesteel and simulated combat weaponry....A spear is much more forgiving.


the Axe is a great choice for a weapon. Very little learning curve. Why because every Dark ages peasant had to cut wood at least once in his life.
people are just different shaped wood. And axes are supposed to be heavy....
MassxAcceleration=Force

anyways Have a nice day.

[richter]

Now as for obsidian weapons? heh....If you had a sword made out of obsidian...perfectly formed (as in a center piece that cooled correctly).
and it was pressure flaked correctly, you would have a sword sharp as a scalpel and with enough mass behind it to make a hatchet look like a sissy. Now a few things to take into reason...

1.yes obsidian is glass. It fractures in a pattern based on the impurities in the glass.
2.Although heavy it is lighter than steel.
3.Obsidian swords were used by mesoamericans*although they had wooden hafts)

One parry against a bone weapon and you're fighting with an obsidian stump.  It's sharper than steel ever could be and excellent for short-bladed weapons like knives, but just not sturdy enough to extend out for a good length.  Mesoamericans using obsidian swords were basically wooden swords embedded with obsidian shards.  It wasn't a true obsidian blade.  Those would be fairly deadly.  But without a more detailed description, one can't tell if the aforementioned obsidian sword was of such a type.  Based on what of a description is there, it sounds like the blade is made of obsidian, which would make it a one-shot-or-you're-finished weapon (and against an armored opponent, simply a you're-finished weapon).

Personally, rather than wood or obsidian, I'd go with bone.  It can hold an edge (obviously a vastly inferior edge compared to obsidian or flint) and is fairly sturdy.  It'd certainly last more than one round, unlike an obsidian-bladed sword.

But yeah, I agree with the spear over them all.  Far more deadly and better reach (and fitted with an obsidian blade, that's incredible penetration power).

Take care,

Jason

[Lohan]

One parry against a bone weapon and you're fighting with an obsidian stump.

WELL, that is somewhat true. As stated previously,  The reason that Obsidian is so fragile is that it is glass, made with impurities inherit to its source. Now as I said if the sword was formed from a piece of obsidian that was mostlyi-pure and cooled and layered correctly (meaning there were no air pockets or debris) then it would be different. But with other factors.

namely,
what is the density of the bone. 'Meks and 'Mets are large creatures they may have a higher bone density higher than Earth creatures. But bones all have a realitive hardness lower than Obsidian. some numbers for you.

all on moh's

fingernails 2.5
Glass/obsidian 5.5
Bone@ 2.5-2.75
Enamel of certain tough animals* (teeth) 4.75-5.0
Chitin 3.5-4.0
Steel 6.0-8.0

*rats
@ Most mammals

Meaning that If your Obsidian sword was made correctly from the correct materials. most armor in Zalanthas is made from Chitinous critters, Leather, or bone. You could hack apart an armored opponent to collops. Would you damage your sword? yes, would you shatter it? If you hit them hard enough...certainly. Zalanthans probably would of figured out that obsidian shatters easily and made their weapons to compensate.

1.Using bracing made of wood or bone along the sides.
2.Using extremly thick pieces of obsidian.
3.Learning to create edges without pressure flaking.

basically what I am saying, take an obsidian sword versus bone sword and both will probably will be destroyed. And a spear with an obsidian head....I like your way of thinking richter....

a two inch obsidian spike attached to a seven foot pole made of Agafari or Baobab with a cross spar. That would be a very effective weapon.


Cheers

[ale six]

I had a character who was using an obsidian-bladed weapon against armored foes. It shattered in combat spam, I didn't notice, and then she got sliced to pieces and killed before I could flee.

So they may do nice damage, but folks: always carry a spare.

[richter]

...bones all have a realitive hardness lower than Obsidian. some numbers for you.

all on moh's

fingernails 2.5
Glass/obsidian 5.5
Bone@ 2.5-2.75
Enamel of certain tough animals* (teeth) 4.75-5.0
Chitin 3.5-4.0
Steel 6.0-8.0

While glass/obsidian is harder than bone, that's not really the characteristic that counts.  One has to factor in how brittle the material is as well.  That, not hardness, will account for durability.  Steel, while harder than bone or glass is also more flexible.  A sword should ideally be able to bend several inches and still hold its shape.  If it doesn't, it wasn't made well.  Thus steel can take a blow and not fracture, unless the steel wasn't of high quality.  That's one of the great advantages of steel.  Bone, while inferior to steel in flexibility (well, some bone that is), is more flexible than obsidian and hence will bend more before it breaks.  Obsidian will not bend.  It will break.  Period.  So, while it's harder than bone, it's less shock-resistant.  Steel, of course as already mentioned, has them both beat.

...a two inch obsidian spike attached to a seven foot pole made of Agafari or Baobab with a cross spar. That would be a very effective weapon.

Yep, it would be.  The obsidian would be short enough that it wouldn't exceed its potential for fracturing while the wooden pole would allow for parrying by absorbing the hit without fracturing.  

Take care,

Jason