Chains

[Arabian Nights]

Thirdly, when all is said and done, Armageddon MUD is a fantasy game. Some things that might be considered a bit unrealistic in real life, such as wielding two medium-sized weapons simultaneously (which is actually possible, just that very few people have the dedication or the time to put into mastering such skills), may be considered acceptable in the game. If you do not think that something is realistic, then simply do not have your character do it. But please do not go around the game telling other people what they can or cannot do; leave it to the staff to judge if someone is being ridiculous or not.

Also found in that link you put there. And I don't see anywhere where it says they are exactly like the earth versions of the same materials. Not as easy as you thought.

Appropriate animals must be hunted, carefully slain, and then the bones extracted in such a way as to give weaponsmiths the best raw material to work with (i.e., undamaged bones). (Note from joyofdiscord: this means that bone, even unshaped, living bone at the very peak of its strength and resiliency within a creature, can be readily damaged in combat, meaning that that bone rapier is going to be in trouble.)

And the code supports weapons breaking. Still don't see what the issue is here. All bones have varying densities and vary in flexibility. You would use the most flexible bone possible for a rapier.

[Dracul]

the code -barely- supports weapons breaking.

I've had a wepon break ONCE in all my playing time.

Kinda made the PC who had 8 weapons on him pointless....I would love to see them break more -especially- the cheap, pos weapons.

[marko]

My own view is that there are many different fantastic creatures in the known world.  Some of them have chitin that is incredibly hard - perhaps as hard as metal.  Others have bones that are so dense they can substitute metal.

As for wood - different trees have different densities as well.  Many of the slow growing trees have ultra-dense properties.  I see nothing wrong with the thought that some of these, when treated properly, would become as strong as metal.

So, the question becomes, why would metal be better?  Does it have to be?  I mean honestly?  Instead, it is just rare.  And because it is rare it is a luxury.  Because it is a luxury it is wanted by everyone.

[Arabian Nights]

the code -barely- supports weapons breaking.

Bullshit. I've shattered so many weapons with different pcs that I've lost count. And seen many others break weapons as well. Your pcs have all been relatively weak or you got lucky.

[Weapon Breaker]

the code -barely- supports weapons breaking.

I've had a wepon break ONCE in all my playing time.

Kinda made the PC who had 8 weapons on him pointless....I would love to see them break more -especially- the cheap, pos weapons.

You are lucky.  I had five weapons break on me in three hours of play.  The next day I had two more break in a single hunting expedition.

The code supports the breaking of weapons but there are a lot of factors involved (as there should be).

My char is human.

[Jherlen]

Joyofdiscord's post pretty much sums up my thoughts... especially where he says that "bone" shouldn't just be treated as a synonym for "steel".

Personally I'd love to see weapons get phased back to the more paleolithic sense, up with the axes and clubs and spears! I'm not saying bone shouldn't be used for weapons, I'm saying lets try and have Zalanthan weapons reflect the primitive technology these people have.

Sokotra's example of the "duelist" guy with a rapier fighting a huge armored guy made me sigh. Zalanthan's don't duel. An honorable fight to the death is about the -last- thing I would ever expect (or want) to see in the game. Would someone ever want to spend that much time getting that good with a rapier? To me they just seem out of place in the theme.

And lets not even go into somebody using a rapier to hunt with.

We can argue that maybe Zalanthan bone is stronger, more flexible, so on and so on and so making rapiers from it is feasible. Fine. Why would anyone want to, either way? You're going to take a nice long piece of this superbone (which someone had to kill something big to get, remember), and shave it down into a rather thin sword, when you could make something thicker, heavier, more destructive and more durable.

I dunno. In the end, I doubt I'll ever have a character use a rapier because to me, they just don't seem to make sense and seem out of place. If people stop buying them, maybe they'll disappear. Heh.

On another note: I -did- see a bone katana once, somewhere.  :shock:

[Anael]

On another note: I -did- see a bone katana once, somewhere.

You mean in game or IRL? :shock:

Back to rapiers: really, folks. RL cavalry rapiers were no swashbuckling duelists' tools and were designed to penetrate armor. Rapier != slim blade. Some authors define a rapier by the swept hilt and that's it. Sometimes you get even a cutlass-like single edged weapon called 'a rapier'!
That doesn't advocate those 'slim rapiers' you can see in game, of course. It's just that everyone seems to think rapiers are always slim, heh.
On the other hand, it's quite funny to roleplay your weapon's downgrades.

em placing one foot onto %body chest, me attempts to pull ~rapier out of the dead man's eye
em stumbles backwards as %rapier slim blade shatters, leaving a good cord of sharpened bone sticking out of ~body
say (peering at the hilt in ^me hand, the blade broken smoothly just a cord away from the guard) Feckin' Salarri!
junk rapier

Allow me to derail this a bit:
Speaking about primitive weapons: is it just me or is there really only few weapons like kylies or throw sticks? They'd make perfect sense to me. Much more than throwing knives and daggers (and there's plenty of those!). I remember seeing only one weapon of this kind in game...

[Sokotra]

Personally I'd love to see weapons get phased back to the more paleolithic sense, up with the axes and clubs and spears! I'm not saying bone shouldn't be used for weapons, I'm saying lets try and have Zalanthan weapons reflect the primitive technology these people have.

I kinda agree with you on that point, but then again I think that is already in place to a certain extent.  It seems to me like most tribes and 'less advanced' peoples of Zalanthas are already created to reflect their primitive technologies.  More 'advanced' armors and weapons seem to have come from the larger and more advanced city-states.  We got locks on our doors and wagons and entire Houses of weapons/armor experts... I'm no expert, but that seems to be a society advanced enough to have created more sophisticated or just 'different' types of weapons.  

Sokotra's example of the "duelist" guy with a rapier fighting a huge armored guy made me sigh. Zalanthan's don't duel. An honorable fight to the death is about the -last- thing I would ever expect (or want) to see in the game. Would someone ever want to spend that much time getting that good with a rapier? To me they just seem out of place in the theme.

I'm not sure I agree with any of that - a duel or a fight to the death does not have to be 'honorable' and the human ego is a strange thing which causes us to do even weirder stuff.

Also, I don't think I said anything about a 'duelist'.  My example was drawn on past experiences in the game and I was trying to make a point that there are different styles of fighting that one may use.  Some prefer chitin armor and large weapons while most prefer lighter protection such as leathers and lighter weapons instead of hauling around huge heavy swords through the desert - it mentions something in the documentation about 'heavy = impractical' in the desert environment of Zalanthas.

This may not always be the case, and I can see how many tougher warriors and races may favor heavier armor or weaponry - but let's not rule out the majority of lean, malnourished denizens which would probably be wearing sandcloth and carrying a stiletto or even a longer, slim blade (sometimes known as a rapier).

What it comes down to for me is that there are many types of people in Zalanthas, from rugged hunters and mercenaries to agile thieves and assasins to brutish thugs and barbarians to swindling swashbucklers and bards.  Why take away the variety and try to get rid of the rapier?  I still don't see why it would not be realistic that there are certain types of people in the world that would favor such weapons.  I also don't think it INCONCEIVABLE ("You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.") that the rapier could be flexible enough to be very useful.  If it bothers people so much, make it out of a flexible chitin or something.  And as someone else mentioned, there are many types or rapiers and they all (if any) aren't toothpick thin.  I like the rapiers, although I agree certain weapons might not fit in the gameworld, for some reason I always thought rapiers did - just as the cutlass does and other weapons that remind me of them thar pirates of the silt sea and other salty dogs of the wastes.  In fact, I think we need more pirate stuff in the game.  :lol:  

A discussion about how certain materials fit or work in the gameworld is good, but lets not get too fussy.

Which brings me back to some more Princess Bride quotes...

Inigo Montoya: That Vizzini, he can *fuss*.
Fezzik: Fuss, fuss... I think he like to scream at *us*.
Inigo Montoya: Probably he means no *harm*.
Fezzik: He's really very short on *charm*.
Inigo Montoya: You have a great gift for rhyme.
Fezzik: Yes, yes, some of the time.
Vizzini: Enough of that.
Inigo Montoya: Fezzik, are there rocks ahead?
Fezzik: If there are, we all be dead.
Vizzini: No more rhymes now, I mean it.
Fezzik: Anybody want a peanut?
Vizzini: DYEEAAHHHHHH.

[richter]

On another note: I -did- see a bone katana once, somewhere.

You mean in game or IRL? :shock:

Back to rapiers: really, folks. RL cavalry rapiers were no swashbuckling duelists' tools and were designed to penetrate armor.

Typically such weapons are refered to as hangers or sabers, not rapiers.

Rapier != slim blade. Some authors define a rapier by the swept hilt and that's it. Sometimes you get even a cutlass-like single edged weapon called 'a rapier'!  That doesn't advocate those 'slim rapiers' you can see in game, of course. It's just that everyone seems to think rapiers are always slim, heh.

By definition, a rapier is a weapon with a straight (though there are examples of single-edged rapiers), double-edged, diamond-shaped, long, thin blade.  Saber, estoc, hanger, etc. are all different from rapiers.  Using the hilt as a means of identifying a rapier is inaccurate since many times rapier hilts were used for other weapons.  This didn't make those weapons rapiers.  If the blade's an inch or more wide, you're not really talking about a rapier but one of these other weapons.  It's sort of like calling a three-wheeled vehicle a bicycle.  If it's got more than two wheels, it can't be a bicycle.  Same thing applies with a rapier.  If the blade's not narrow, it's not a rapier.

Take care,

Jason

[Jherlen]

I'm all for pirates and swashbuckling in general, sure (who doesn't like pirates? Seriously.) ... I just don't think that three musketeers style swashbuckler fighting really makes sense in Zalanthas. Who would you rather hire for any job, the thin guy with his dinky sword or the rough mercenary who'll just club that guy over the head? Most Zalanthan fighters either are mercenaries or fight them. Lighter weapons and lighter fighting styles make sense, sure, and for those there are staves (which seem vastly underrepresented), halfswords, knives, etc. All of those make a lot more sense than whittling a long piece of bone down so much into a rapier. Anyway, as I said, it just never made sense to me.

And yeah, I saw the bone katana in the game.

[richter]

Just to dispel a rumor (since I might not have been clear about it), while they're thin, real rapiers aren't really lighter than your typical sword (most of which, regardless of size are the same approximate weight).  Some rapiers are actually heavier because of the thick, diamond-shaped blade and the extra length.  Regular swords would be flatter and possess a fuller to reduce the weight.  Rapiers don't have that advantage.  However, in comparison to a regular-bladed sword, while heavier, the rapier is far less sturdy.

I've played around with a rapier and my first thought was, "God, this is a lot heavier than I expected."  That's one reason many experts believe the rapier's use was so short.  It was an inferior weapon.  Note that the saber (derived from the cutlass) ended up being the prefered sword of the post-rapier period for officers throughout the European nations and the States.

Take care,

Jason

[Anael]

By definition, a rapier is a weapon with a straight (though there are examples of single-edged rapiers), double-edged, diamond-shaped, long, thin blade. Saber, estoc, hanger, etc. are all different from rapiers. Using the hilt as a means of identifying a rapier is inaccurate since many times rapier hilts were used for other weapons.

"definition" is the keyword here. Whose definition?
We could throw different authors and different approaches at each other and never find the truth. You could name J. Clements, who says rapiers are just those narrow, thrusting weapons, I could name M. Kaspryk, who uses the word as a much broader group of weapons. As I mentioned earlier, originally, there was no common name for "a rapier" and it was created later (based on a word some people used when they laughed at those new edge-less swords). Calling something 'a definition of a rapier' isn't exactly a good idea.
I once saw two blades in a museum. The blades were almost identical, just dating and hilts were different. One label said 'epee', the other said 'rapier'. There's no neat and clear definition, unless you use one from wiki or google. Which'd be quite amusing.
Similarly, english people call "palash" a sabre (some even call it a rapier, as I said earlier). There's a whole -lot- of differences between turkish sabre and a palash, yet english calls them the same. Same goes to handaxes and ciupagas, chekans and warhammers... and so on and so on...

To be nitpicky, rapiers were double-edged only in the first century of their existence. Later on, they rarely had sharpened cutting edges. First using a strict definition of a rapier and then calling it 'double-edged' is almost as bad as calling a three-wheeled vehicle a bicycle
Rapiers with a ricasso width of one inch were quite common. Standard definition epee blade width is 3/4 inches and rapiers can have a double-epee blade. Perhaps you were thinking a foil or a smallsword there?

Just to backup what I say, my main resources are AHF and swordforum.com

Oh and, cavalry rapier is a term. It's no hanger nor saber, that's a completely different blade shape.

Anyway... no comments on my little 'throwstick' derailment? o.O

[richter]

I once saw two blades in a museum. The blades were almost identical, just dating and hilts were different. One label said 'epee', the other said 'rapier'. There's no neat and clear definition, unless you use one from wiki or google. Which'd be quite amusing.

Epee is essentially what rapiers ended up becoming and application of the term is based upon the fighting style more than the difference in weapons.

To be nitpicky, rapiers were double-edged only in the first century of their existence. Later on, they rarely had sharpened cutting edges.

Same goes for many swords which is why I did not say "sharpened".  You really didn't need a sharpened edge when fighting against armored opponents, just an edge.  So, you're not really nitpicking, you're just misunderstanding what I meant.

First using a strict definition of a rapier and then calling it 'double-edged' is almost as bad as calling a three-wheeled vehicle a bicycle

Actually, you're simply confusing "double-edged" and "sharpened".  By definition all swords possess an edge (or two).  The edge may or may not be sharpened.

Rapiers with a ricasso width of one inch were quite common. Standard definition epee blade width is 3/4 inches and rapiers can have a double-epee blade. Perhaps you were thinking a foil or a smallsword there?

Last time I checked, "one inch" and "3/4 inches" were narrower than other swords (I have seen a rapier with a blade 1.25 inches wide, but again, given the length of the blade, this width is quite disproportional when compared to other swords).  The rapier is a double-edged weapon with a diamond-shaped blade.  No, not thinking of a foil or a smallsword, though all three would be equally out of place in a technological-level like that of Zalanthas.

Anyway... no comments on my little 'throwstick' derailment? o.O

Well, I'm not very familiar with them (having thrown one a couple times but never really given them much study), but given the differences between Zalanthan life (quite often large and armored), I don't know how effective they'd be.  They're a Neolithic weapon so they'd probably be "advanced" by Zalanthan standards (though considering the improbable existance of swords, their evolution would be more convoluted).

I'd likely agree that they should be present, along with the atlatl discussed in another topic.  Therein lies the problem.  That these weapons are absent alongside the existance of swords in a non-metal-using society is improbable.  Given the technology available, the existance of swords really doesn't make sense, which throws off the development of other weapons.  A non-metal-using society that develops swords but not throw-sticks and atlatls is sort of like a society inventing the carburator without having invented the car or even the wheel.

Maybe we should start a petition....

Take care,

Jason

[Anael]

Heh, no worries, this is not about rapiers. We both said what we wanted to say and it's clear we won't agree with each other.

The question of Zalanthan technology was always a bit unclear to me. The whole world gives me this pre-neolithic feeling, but then there are fairly complex things like locks and crossbows.
There is probably a difference between city-states and desert tribes when it comes to technologies.

Oh and one thing... when people say bone would break upon striking armour, they should remember the armor is quite often made of chitin or leather. Similarly, a bone chain holding a bone chandelier might be less sturdy, but it also has to deal with a lighter thing than an iron chain holding a chandelier made of iron.

[Rindan]

Heh, no worries, this is not about rapiers. We both said what we wanted to say and it's clear we won't agree with each other.

The question of Zalanthan technology was always a bit unclear to me. The whole world gives me this pre-neolithic feeling, but then there are fairly complex things like locks and crossbows.
There is probably a difference between city-states and desert tribes when it comes to technologies.

You need to realize that Zalanthas is a world that DID have a relativly advanced civilization.  Why the details are murky as to how advanced it was, I would feel pretty safe to compared the old pre-dragon civilizations to at least that of Rome, if not even more advanced.  This easily justifies the rather odd assortment of weapon.

[JollyGreenGiant]

Bone is a lot stronger than most people seem to be giving it credit for.  The human thigh bone is stronger than concrete, for example.  Now, think about the thigh bone of something big, say, a Tyranosaurus.  That upper leg bone must have had an incredible amount of strength to be able to not only support the dinosaur, but also be able to withstand the forces generated by muscle actions when the dinosaur ran.

Zalanthas has mekillots with bone structures that have to be capable of supporting several TONS of weight, and probably hundreds of pounds worth of torque.  Cut down to size but properly treated, mek bone would still retain an incredible amount of structural integrity, more than enough to see use as a sword-type weapon.

[richter]

Bone is a lot stronger than most people seem to be giving it credit for.  The human thigh bone is stronger than concrete, for example.  Now, think about the thigh bone of something big, say, a Tyranosaurus.  That upper leg bone must have had an incredible amount of strength to be able to not only support the dinosaur, but also be able to withstand the forces generated by muscle actions when the dinosaur ran.

Zalanthas has mekillots with bone structures that have to be capable of supporting several TONS of weight, and probably hundreds of pounds worth of torque.  Cut down to size but properly treated, mek bone would still retain an incredible amount of structural integrity, more than enough to see use as a sword-type weapon.

Except that bone becomes quite brittle after a while (as in after harvested and separated from a living being).  Even treated, it won't have the strength of living bone.  Additionally, in the case of a rapier, we're talking a narrow blade.

Nothing saying bone isn't strong enough to be used as a weapon.  It definitely is.  However, the weapon type ought to conform to the material used, which doesn't appear to be the case with a few.

Take care,

Jason

[JollyGreenGiant]

Even treated, it won't have the strength of living bone.

That's an assumption based on real-life science and thinking.  While some of that does apply to Zalanthas, there's nothing that says that the Salarri haven't come up with a chemical treatment based on marilla sap and anakore blood that doesn't lock in the strength of the living bone for whatever period of time you want to make up... a year, five years, eternity.

Obviously there's -some- process out there that turns bone into uber-durable isilt, so perhaps going halfway through the process gives you treated bone with an exceptionally lengthy period of time before it starts to degrade in earnest.

And don't forget magick.

[richter]

Even treated, it won't have the strength of living bone.

That's an assumption based on real-life science and thinking.  While some of that does apply to Zalanthas, there's nothing that says that the Salarri haven't come up with a chemical treatment based on marilla sap and anakore blood that doesn't lock in the strength of the living bone for whatever period of time you want to make up... a year, five years, eternity.

There's also nothing to state the opposite, that living bone doesn't have greater strength.  However, if you've ever crafted with bone, including bone you've harvested yourself, was there a crafted treatment you had to use first?  If not, that would lend evidence against your hypothesis.

Obviously there's -some- process out there that turns bone into uber-durable isilt

No, it's not obvious that there is until there is evidence that bone should be treated as such.  Barring a direct statement from staff, there is no guarantee that bone is "uber-durable".

And don't forget magick.

If magick can make bone as strong as steel, why can't magick simply make iron?  Magick is a last resort when a) you want a result that exceeds the realm of reality, b) you want a result that you didn't plan well enough for to begin with.  Magick could be used as an excuse to do a variety of things if it's given widespread use over materials, but that's not always a legitimate method.  After all, not everyone can use magick but does that mean anyone who can craft with bone does use magick?  If bone is changed using magick and I can craft with bone, does that mean I had the ability to change the bone into psuedo-iron?

Standards.  Definable standards are what are needed.  What are the limits of materials and why.  The limits/qualities might not be known to the characters, but it should at least be known to the staff and players, not guessed at.

Take care,

Jason

[JollyGreenGiant]

Obviously there's -some- process out there that turns bone into uber-durable isilt

Isilt.  There might even be a "help isilt".  If so, read it.  Isilt exists in game.  Isilt is processed bone.  Isilt is uber-durable.  That is all.

[sarahjc]

First I'd like to say that Jason's ending statement reminds me of Dirr. But that has nothing to do with the conversation at hand.

I think you guys are reading way to much into this. There is way too much stuff made from bone in the game for it to be questioned as a durable substance and one that can withstand a lot of abuse.

Now, possibilities for why this is:

Maybe Zalanthan creatures have far more dense bone that earth ones do.

Maybe there is a treatment that cures it to be stronger. (I mean really, we don't wash our clothing with purple salt rocks on earth, but I don't see you questioning that logic either.)

Maybe there is a treatment that cures it to be flexable and then another to make it strong and that's how you have chains.

Isilt.  There might even be a "help isilt".  If so, read it.  Isilt exists in game.  Isilt is processed bone.  Isilt is uber-durable.  That is all.

There is even a special place you can watch this process.. Shhh!!

Are any of these realistic? No.. Is a dragon, a desert planet, magickers, sorcerer kings and glowing jems any more so? A sea made of silt?

Say it with me, Fantasy!

If I was looking for lots of realstic things, I'd go play that game called Real Life.

(edited just to be a jerk)

Take Care,

Sarah

[SewerRat_inTheOpen]

I can understand what this is about, people trying to push the game towards half realism and practicality, pushing for the changes they see will move the mud towards somewhere better.

It's just like playing CS. How the hell does anyone take so many bullets and still remain standing? In RL, if I take 1 hit to the head from a glock, the probablity of me surviving is close to nil. What's worse, mutliple shots from a mp5 to the body or a clipshot from an artic to the head?

It's a game, even if the imms don't want us to think that, those evil... [goes into a muttering fit]

Know what's great about a game? There can be magicks and spellbooks, swords and warriors, dragons and dragon slayers and damsels in distress and rapists. Things that brook no explanation, about why x chemical plus y chemical = abc. Because by the very simple fact that they exist, so they are real.

[Anonymous]

First I'd like to say that Jason's ending statement reminds me of Dirr. But that has nothing to do with the conversation at hand.

No clue who Dirr is so I haven't any idea if that was meant as an insult, a compliment, or just an observation.

Now, possibilities for why this is:

Maybe Zalanthan creatures have far more dense bone that earth ones do.

Maybe.  Maybe not.  What I'm pointing out is the lack of any definitive statement to the effect of one or the other.

Maybe there is a treatment that cures it to be stronger. (I mean really, we don't wash our clothing with purple salt rocks on earth, but I don't see you questioning that logic either.)

Actually, there are numerous methods of washing clothes.  My personal favorite to tell people of is the use of urine.  And in this example, the "purple salt rocks" could contain sodium carbonate, which would make them effective for washing clothes.

Maybe there is a treatment that cures it to be flexable and then another to make it strong and that's how you have chains.

Say it with me, Fantasy!

Just because it's fantasy doesn't mean there aren't standards for materials.

If I was looking for lots of realstic things, I'd go play that game called Real Life.

Do you use the emote to make your character float around the room by flapping your arms or other such things that wouldn't be reasonable?  No.  Why?  Standards.  It's not possible to float around the room just by flapping your arms.  Why?  Because you can't create enough lift to raise your bodyweight.  The same thing is being discussed here.  There are limits to materials, regardless of whether or not you or I or anyone has stopped to consider them.  They may not be the same as "real" equivalents, but there should be standards for their qualities and limits beyond the "sounds cool" factor.

Take care,

Jason

[richter]

Above post was by me.  Must have timed me out while I was AFK.

[jcarter]

Even treated, it won't have the strength of living bone.

That's an assumption based on real-life science and thinking.  While some of that does apply to Zalanthas, there's nothing that says that the Salarri haven't come up with a chemical treatment based on marilla sap and anakore blood that doesn't lock in the strength of the living bone for whatever period of time you want to make up... a year, five years, eternity.

There's also nothing to state the opposite, that living bone doesn't have greater strength.  However, if you've ever crafted with bone, including bone you've harvested yourself, was there a crafted treatment you had to use first?  If not, that would lend evidence against your hypothesis.

Obviously there's -some- process out there that turns bone into uber-durable isilt

No, it's not obvious that there is until there is evidence that bone should be treated as such.  Barring a direct statement from staff, there is no guarantee that bone is "uber-durable".

And don't forget magick.

If magick can make bone as strong as steel, why can't magick simply make iron?  Magick is a last resort when a) you want a result that exceeds the realm of reality, b) you want a result that you didn't plan well enough for to begin with.  Magick could be used as an excuse to do a variety of things if it's given widespread use over materials, but that's not always a legitimate method.  After all, not everyone can use magick but does that mean anyone who can craft with bone does use magick?  If bone is changed using magick and I can craft with bone, does that mean I had the ability to change the bone into psuedo-iron?

Standards.  Definable standards are what are needed.  What are the limits of materials and why.  The limits/qualities might not be known to the characters, but it should at least be known to the staff and players, not guessed at.

Take care,

Jason

I don't think you're going to like this game very much if you see something as minor as extra-strong bones and get upset. Try suspending your disbelief.