RPG''s all seem to have certain weapon stats, but how realistic are they? Is a battle axe fast or slow? Does it do a lot of damage or not? Did they stab or slash with a great sword in the middle ages? Is a katana better than a sword? Is a mace slower or faster than a sword, more or less damage, more or less aim? Basicly I''m building up a weapon list for a possible RPG I''m planning to make, with those stats for each weapon: Damage, Aim, Speed, Defence Bonus For example I could give a spear a defence bonus because it''s so long that the opponent is further away from you, and a dagger is obviously faster than a battle axe (or isn''t it?). The hardest thing to decide is actually "Aim". Is there somewhere a site that describes all those medieval weapon types how they were actually used and what the strengths and weaknesses of those weapons are in reality? Thanks

You won''t be able to accurately model the performance and comparative strengths and weaknesses of these weapons with simple damage, accuracy, speed and defense bonus variables. Instead of trying to make them accurate representations of their real-world counterparts, just try to balance them within the game to make it the most entertaining possible experience for the player.

If you want to get crazy with it, you''ll deal with all kinds of problems. For instance, that defense bonus you want to give the spear would only work at a certain range. Sure, you can hit a guy before his sword can reach you, but if he gets inside the radius of your most effective attacks, he''ll have a sword and you''ll have a stick that''s too long, which is actually a disadvantage. A katana, well used, is among the most elegant and deadly weapons ever carried by infantry, but due to the low-quality steel the Japanese had during their feudal eras, the katana was easily dulled or cracked against hard targets such as steel armor. Since the Japanese seldom used such defensive gear (again due to low quality of ore), the katana''s deeath-dealing power was nearly unlimited, but against a man in mail, it''s a light club. The swords in use in medieval Europe were often harder and more resilient, but couldn''t keep an edge for beans, and so they were usually rather blunt. Good enough to hack off an arm if you put enough force behind it, but nothing so graceful as an oriental Scimitar or tachi.

The point is that there is no way for an RPG battle system to use the actual properties of actual weapons in a battle engine unless it is the most incredible, revolutionary, inspired battle engine ever. Balance the game, and fudge the authenticity.

Agreed, unless you're willing to give each weapon individual stats for weight, balance, range, damage type, sharpness, and material strength and balance those numbers against the user's various skills in the weapon of choice, related combat skills, endurance, strength, agility and encumberance AND balance BOTH sets against the opponent's equivalent...

In terms of research, just do it. There is no single site that has everything you need, just go google medieval weapons, medieval swords, and feudal japanese weapons as a start.

If you want a decent game example, go play Bushido Blade; while not an rpg and skills aren't a factor, it will give you an idea of how different weapons are/can be used "relatively accurately" in a game format.


[edited by - EricTrickster on April 26, 2004 10:11:39 PM]

quote:

---

Original post by Iron Chef Carnage
The swords in use in medieval Europe were often harder and more resilient, but couldn''t keep an edge for beans, and so they were usually rather blunt. Good enough to hack off an arm if you put enough force behind it, but nothing so graceful as an oriental Scimitar or tachi.

---

This is somewhat off-topic, but most Medieval era European swords actually had a lower Rockwell rating (a measure of the steel''s "hardness") then most katanas. There were, as you say, more resilient for the same reason, though.

quote:

---

Is a katana better than a sword?

---

A katana is a sword.

As Iron Chef Carnage asserts, the swords were made for different purposes; neither was inherently better than the other.

Sorry if I went off track, swords and smithing is another hobby of mine.

I agree, weapon stats are off. any weapon can do a lot of dammage if used correctly. granted a knife or sword won't be able to pierce platemail, but it could be used to stap between plates and disable. I have never agreed that weapon stats are accurate becaues skill is the driving point behind a weapons dammage. A katana won't do a damn thing in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to use a sword. Besides, with enough strength you would be surprised how fast a heavy object can be used. Besides what good is a spear if someone can cut it up?

[edited by - giffard on April 27, 2004 10:56:47 AM]

I apologize for jumping on the thread, but it seems like a good place to ask this...

Lets say there''s a guy in full plate armor. And then there''s 3 equally strong men...one with a Sword, one with an Axe, and one with a Mace. Each of the 3 gets one good swing at the Armored guy''s chest. Which weapon would be most damaging?

I imagine the sword would be the least effective. But I''m uncertain when it comes to the other 2. The heavy, blunt Mace would probably knock the guy around quite a bit. And then the Axe seems like a combination of the other two, and I''m not certain how it''d fare against armor.

Thanks for any hypothesis and answers. It''s a bit general, but it may help me to lay down a decent groundwork for other things.

Pure hypothesis here, since I've never swung at anyone in plate nor have I been swung on while wearing plate :-p

But in theory, if you got clean swings, I would think in order of "damage" (and that becomes relative to type of damage) it would be Axe, Mace, then Sword.

I'm assuming a very simple double-edged cruciform sword (think English Knight), a wooden shafted/steel headed "battle axe" with back spike, and a flanged battle mace (shorter, spiked head) for "testing" purposes.

The mace is lighter than the axe and in theory quicker, but the axe can puncture the plate deeper. The mace is better for attacking the extremities, bludgeoning the arms and head until either the armor is so badly dented as to be useless or rending the arm useless (or caving in your opponent's head, despite the helm). The axe can achieve the same with decidedly more deadly results - the back spike was used to puncture through plate, rather than being deflected aside by the armor's curvature as would the axe head and the sword.

My personal preference, however, would be none of the above. I'd rather use a variation of the war hammer against plate, a French version called a Bec de Corbin. It has a small hammer head, a back spike, and a top spike like a pike. It is mounted on a long wooden shaft with a metal butt end to smash the foot of your opponent. A slower weapon than the others, but with metal langets protecting the shaft it was great for blocking as well as attacking, and allowed you to keep your opponent at a distance. Using the top spike in the same manner as a pike or spear, you could puncture straight through plate armor and into a man's chest.

[edited by - EricTrickster on April 27, 2004 12:02:17 PM]

from the top of my head...


damage type - blunt, slashing, piercing
damage severity - arbitrary from low to high
power - indicates how difficult it is to stop or deflect the blow.
speed - or clumsiness, does the weapon have high mass that needs to be accelerated, also weapon size etc. the higher the faster.
skill requirements - how proficient does the wielder have to be to fully utilise the weapon.


as a general guideline I figured the weapon types would distribute like this:

blunt:
blunt weapons are the jacks of all trades - easy to use and work equally well against unarmored & all armors except plate. very reliable damage output.
damage severity: average
power: average
speed: average
skill requ: low

slashing:
slashing damage is very effective against unarmored or lightly armored targets, but quickly becomes useless against heavier armors (ringmail&plate).
damage severity: high
power: average
speed: average
skill requ: medium

piercing:
piercing damage is deadly, but difficult to put much force into. works well against all armors but is difficult to use against heavy armors due to the generally low power. exceptions (such as hammers designed to pierce armor) exist. also requires a lot of skill to use proficiently.
damage severity: very high
power: low
speed: fast
skill requ: high



armor would work based on the damage type and the power of the attack - the higher the power, the less likely that the attack is stopped.

the game model behind this could look something like this:

attack successful (=hit) -> armor reduces power by a certain factor (+- a random amount) depending on the damage type -> if the power hits zero then no damage is taken -> if there´s power left -> multiply remaining power with damage severity to get the HP loss.

of course you can sprinkle a lot of gizmos into the hit determination (such as raising the power with a successful roll, etc.)

for example, a ring mail shirt with a padded vest underneath would work like this:

against blunt: slightly reduces power
against slashing: reduces power
against piercing: slightly reduces power





a few examples for weapons:

wooden club:
desc: your average heavy stick.
damage type: blunt
damage severity: medium (makes a hearty "knock" sound but won´t cause deadly wounds right away)
power: medium
speed: medium (not as heavy as a mace or a sword, but still requires a swing)
skill requirements: none (very user friendly)

rapier:
desc: the renaissance pointy thing.
damage type: piercing
damage severity: high
power: medium
speed: high
skill requirements: high

battle axe:
desc: heavy axe with long handle
damage type: slashing
damage severity: very high
power: high
speed: low
skill requirements: low

longsword:
desc: our medieval favourite
damage type: slashing / piercing
damage severity: medium(slashing) / high(piercing)
power: high(slashing)/medium(piercing)
speed: medium/medium
skill requirements: medium

dagger:
desc: small and pointy
damage type: piercing
damage severity: high
power: low
speed: very high
skill requirements: low


katana:
desc: the stylish alternative from asia
damage type: slashing
damage severity: very high
power: medium
speed: high
skill requirements: high

"crows beak" warhammer:
desc: warhammer with a point.
damage type: piercing.
damage severity: high
power: high
speed: slow
skill requirements: low

What it all boils down to is physics. You''re dealing with all sorts of goodies like forces, vectors, collisions, harness, and deformation, and that''s just for things like penetration and wound size. Unless you''re going for a really precise combat engine, just work on summarizing things. After all, putting all these elements in is a lot of work, and it might not even result in something the player''s really notice.

That being said, I have done some looking into "weapon physics". Here''s some of what I''ve worked out. Any comments and ideas are welcome.

Damage is for impact weaponry is roughly proportional to their kinetic energy. Kinetic energy equals mass * velocity squared / 2. This means a weapons damage is dependant on the mass of the object as well as it''s speed. Mauls are take the high mass approach, while bullets go for high velocity. For hand-to-hand weapons, this energy comes from the user''s muscles. In short, the stronger the character, the more force they can impart. This means a stronger character can put more enegry into heavier weapons, increasing both their speed and damage. However, there is a limit to this effect. The human body has a minimal time to complete certain actions, thus limiting the maximum velocity of a weapon. This is why very light weapons are often less effective. The character may have more raw muscle power, but much of this is never user because it''s not need to raise that weapon to maximum velocity. Thus the question with heavier weapons is finding one that lets you use your full force, while not slowing the attack rate excessively. This is why stronger types normally use heavier weapons, they feel less hindered by the weapon''s mass.

As for weapon shapes, the smaller the area of the striker the surface, the higher the potential pentration. This happens because the same force over a smaller area means a greater amount of pressure at that point. broad surfaces are better at distributing impact (moving the target more than deforming them), while focused surfaces are better at going throught the target. Of corse, smaller areas also seem more prone to deflection if the blow is not head-on. Even if a hammer is deflected it still tend to do some damage, possibly tearing away some material, while edged and pointed weapons seem to do less.

As far as I can tell, harness seems to have the effect of returning or redirecting a portion of the weapon''s force. Harder armors cause more of the force to "rebound", while softer material provide less resistance.

Now, for the plate mail example... It''d have to go for axe, sword, then mace if you were going for the chest. Having most of the mass on the end seems to amplify the effects of mass, at least for swung attacks. I think it has to do with the center of balance and lever action invoved. Notice that there are few thrusting weapons with a heavy front. Also, if the axe has a curved blade, that''s actually a smaller impact area, hence more penetration. If the mace has spikes that upgrades the espimate a little, since they increase it''s penetration power. A blunt mace is unlikely to actually break throught he plate. However, there is a good chance of deforming the plate. Since most plate mail was tightly fitted, this means the dent will be forced into the wearer, inflicting constant pressure and possibly restricitng brething.
If I had more of a choice, I''d go for a pick or even a stilleto. The piercing tip would be just the thing to punch through the armor plate.
Of course, all these choices assume I''m aiming for the chest of an immobile figure. If aiming for the head, this balance out a bit more. After all, blunt force to the head can still cause disorientation, meaning I can probably get another shot. In combat, things would change a bit. Since it''s a moving target, the high pentration weapons are more likely to get deflected, whereas any hit with the mace will probably leave at least a dent. Also, I''d probably go for a more balanced weapon, since unbalanced weapons are generally slower and I want to be able to move and defend as needed.

quote:

---

Original post by MikeMJH
Medieval era European swords actually had a lower Rockwell rating (a measure of the steel's "hardness") then most katanas. There were, as you say, more resilient for the same reason, though.

---

You're absolutely right. I should have said they were less brittle. Good catch.

I recall reading somewhere that the two most effective ways to kill a fully armored man in the iddle ages were to beat him to death with a club or drown him in a puddle. A thin knife through the face was also good, if more dangerous to pull off.

At the end of the day, if you're using HP, your weapons can't possible be authentic. A sword to the breastplate would do no damage at all to the man wearing it. If he's got the right stuff on underneath, he could take swordblows to the thick parts of his armor all day long without getting really hurt.

The weapons designed to fight against armored me were not exectly knightly. Someone will have to help me with names, but there were big pick-looking things, spears with long steel needle points, and a variety of puncturing hammers used to get through steel armor. I'd probably stick to the puddle, though, if I could get the sword/axe/horse away from him.

Edit: Vagrant Story is a good example of a system that keeps some superficial properties of the weapons but then goes ahead and balances them for gameplay. I don't like a lot of the add-ons and such, but the taxonomy is good.

[edited by - Iron Chef Carnage on April 27, 2004 5:29:09 PM]