use a greatsword from horseback?
mark...@io.com
i don't think there's anything in the new PHB, but has an opinion on this
matter been expressed in the past?
Hari the Monk
take into consideration 'real world' mechanics. If 'real world' mechanics
were taken into account, there wouldn't be anything but Fighters and Rogues.
Hari the Monk
<mark...@io.com> wrote in message
news:markovic-160...@aus-as4-047.io.com...
Deykin ap Gwion
>
> That's like saying just because there are people who don't die when they
> fall off tall building therefore the laws of physics don't work at all.
> Thats a stupid argument. Magics, miracles and other unnatural events are the
> exceptions to the rule in DnD world, not the norm. That's why most campaigns
> are based on the Prime Material Plane. I'd have no arguments if you were
> trying to use a great sword on horseback in the Astral Plane (anything goes
> in the Astral Plane) but doing that on the Prime Material Plane would just
> result in you falling off the horse and breaking your spinal cord in 6
> different places.
Shouldn't that be d6 different places??
--
Deykin ap Gwion
My E-mail service may be cheesy, but my email address isn't.
"Those who beat their swords into ploughs will plow for
those that don't"
Deirdre M. Brooks
Hari the Monk wrote:
>
> The answer would be yes. This is because the DnD system is too abstract to
> take into consideration 'real world' mechanics. If 'real world' mechanics
> were taken into account, there wouldn't be anything but Fighters and Rogues.
You know, I played in a game once in which the DM actually wanted to do
that. She moderated her stance to simply exclude true Clerics and make
all spellcasters Wizards.
That was fun for all of two sessions. :-)
--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xe...@teleport.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"Atlantic City is Oz envisioned by used car salesmen and pimps."
http://www.teleport.com/~xenya | --Rick Glumsky, Celtic Filth
SilentKG
>Date: 8/16/00 10:02 PM Eastern
>is it possible to use a greatsword from horseback?
>
>i don't think there's anything in the new PHB, but has an opinion on this
>matter been expressed in the past?
>
I have not seen a rule in the PHB.
Real world mechanics though says no. Greatswords were used to hack knights
apart who fell off their horses via pole arms use ( being hooked and pulled
off).
Another rule is that a man on horseback cannot attack a ground fighter with
short sword. Thats why the longsword became popular.
Gattaca
fall off tall building therefore the laws of physics don't work at all.
Thats a stupid argument. Magics, miracles and other unnatural events are the
exceptions to the rule in DnD world, not the norm. That's why most campaigns
are based on the Prime Material Plane. I'd have no arguments if you were
trying to use a great sword on horseback in the Astral Plane (anything goes
in the Astral Plane) but doing that on the Prime Material Plane would just
result in you falling off the horse and breaking your spinal cord in 6
different places.
"Hari the Monk" <bb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:QWIm5.8560$KD1....@news1.atl...
> The answer would be yes. This is because the DnD system is too abstract
to
> take into consideration 'real world' mechanics. If 'real world' mechanics
> were taken into account, there wouldn't be anything but Fighters and
Rogues.
>
> Hari the Monk
Dr Nuncheon
Heck no. Not without chopping your horse's head off.
I suppose you could stick it out and try to hit someone as you rode by,
but it'd be clumsy and do less damage. In general two-handed weapons are
not for use on horseback. (Short bows and crossbows are exceptions...let's
say 2-handed melee weapons.)
Get a bastard sword. Use it one-handed on horseback and two-handed on
foot. That's as good as it's going to get.
J
--
INTERNET SEEMS TO BE FULL OF MILLIONS OF | Jeff Johnston
IDIOTS & LUNATICS ! ! - c2 (ts...@my-deja.com) | jeffj @ io . com
grimb...@my-deja.com
"Hari the Monk" <bb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> The answer would be yes. This is because the DnD system is too abstract to
> take into consideration 'real world' mechanics. If 'real world' mechanics
> were taken into account, there wouldn't be anything but Fighters and Rogues.
>
> Hari the Monk
>
you can't control your mount and swing the weapon the way you have to use
it ". It is clearly a two handed slashing weapon, and yes i don't know
the page # in a book where it says "Hey stupid you can't use a big two
handed slashing weapon from the back of a mount, even though there are
minatures out there with guys riding around sporting what would have to
be greatswords ".
Heck a clever little bastard could even say, "Well ny charcter is really
strong and the handle on my great sword is long enough i shuld be able to
use it that way" so the DM could then "say sure go ahead and take your
non profficient bonus, you never learned to use the sword that way, and
you'll only do damage as a spear since you will not be taking advantage
of your weapons design, make a dex roll to hold the weapon if you did hit
a target and the wepon is going to have to save to avoid taking damage
since it wasn't designed to be thrust with such force in that manner."
all calls I'd say would bear up to rules lawyer scrutiny at least while
I'm the DM.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bryan J. Maloney
> is it possible to use a greatsword from horseback?
Only as a strange sort of lance.
--
For those in the know, potrzebie is truly necessary.
Preston Becker
> > is it possible to use a greatsword from horseback?
I have never seen jousters have a hand free for the riens. THey usually
use shield plus a weapon. IMO, warhorses are trained diffently than
typical riding mounts. THey are trained to respond to other commands in
addition to bit and bridle. FOr example, squeezing your legs together
might mean canter, tapping with the left spur might mean turn left.
This would allow two-handed weapons to be used from horseback. That
being said, I don't think a two-handed sword would be the ideal weapon
for mounted combat, unless you had pretty good barding...
My 2 copper's worth
preston
>
> i don't think there's anything in the new PHB, but has an opinion on this
> matter been expressed in the past?
>
> --
> mark...@io.com
Sir Bob
>
> matter been expressed in the past?
It's not a question of where he *grips* it, it's a simple problem of weight
ratios.
Seriously, though, the Ride skill description says it's possible to ride a
horse without using yer hands, thus leaving both hands free for weapons, but
think about it. How in the flibberty heck are you supposed to get enough
leverage to swing a greatsword while plunked down on top of a moving
quarduped? Try swinging a sledgehammer sitting down.
Sir Bob
P.S. Nih!
john v verkuilen
>handed slashing weapon from the back of a mount, even though there are
>minatures out there with guys riding around sporting what would have to
>be greatswords ".
Ah, miniatures, *wonderful* source of factual information there....
Jay
--
J. Verkuilen ja...@uiuc.edu
"Man has such a predilection for systems and abstract deductions that he is
ready to distort the truth intentionally, he is ready to deny the evidence of
his senses only to justify his logic." - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Strife
if the sword was magical and weighed almost nothing, then maybe.
Also if you're riding by and decide to take a swing at something that's
above you and the horse, say a giant's kneecap, then also maybe. But trying
to free the massive sword, bring it into a striking position and swing
effectively? Probably not -- you're better off using a lance and then a
long/broad/bastard sword.
Cheers,
Trevor
<mark...@io.com> wrote in message
news:markovic-160...@aus-as4-047.io.com...
> is it possible to use a greatsword from horseback?
>
> i don't think there's anything in the new PHB, but has an opinion on this
> matter been expressed in the past?
>
> --
> mark...@io.com
SilentKG
>back of a mount, even though there are
>>minatures out there with guys riding around sporting what would have to
>>be greatswords ".
>
>Ah, miniatures, *wonderful* source of factual information there....
>
Come tot think of it....
Warhemmer as a fig with a gy using a 2 hander on horseback. And the sculptor
was one of the Perry twins. For guys who do medival re-enacting they messed
that up.
Rupert Boleyn
wrote:
>> is it possible to use a greatsword from horseback?
>>
>> i don't think there's anything in the new PHB, but has an opinion on this
>> matter been expressed in the past?
>
>It's not a question of where he *grips* it, it's a simple problem of weight
>ratios.
>
>Seriously, though, the Ride skill description says it's possible to ride a
>horse without using yer hands, thus leaving both hands free for weapons, but
>think about it. How in the flibberty heck are you supposed to get enough
>leverage to swing a greatsword while plunked down on top of a moving
>quarduped? Try swinging a sledgehammer sitting down.
Bear in mind that when you swing you'll probably be standing on the
stirrups, not sitting in the saddle. Also medieval mounted troops used
to have their stirrup straps very long, so that even when you were
sitting your legs were nearly straight. This would make it a lot
easier to put your weight behind a swing. However, despite this I
personally have my doubts about using 2-handed melee weapons on
horseback.
--
Rupert Boleyn <rbo...@paradise.net.nz>
"Inside every cynic is a romantic trying to get out."
hnei...@accessweb.com
The Scottish Claymore (definitely a 2 handed sword) was designed for
use on horseback. Although its haft is big enough for two hands, the
rider would normally hold the reins with one hand and the sword in the
other. Rather than the swing of the weilder's arm, most damage
resulted from the swoop of the sword downwards, and the momentum
imparted by the horse.
The two handed sword (or, at least, the Scottish version) was rarely
used off horseback - it was too big, too heavy and too slow.
But let's not let reality intrude into our happy little fantasy game.
Travis Casey
> The Scottish Claymore (definitely a 2 handed sword) was designed for
> use on horseback. Although its haft is big enough for two hands, the
> rider would normally hold the reins with one hand and the sword in the
> other. Rather than the swing of the weilder's arm, most damage
> resulted from the swoop of the sword downwards, and the momentum
> imparted by the horse.
>
> The two handed sword (or, at least, the Scottish version) was rarely
> used off horseback - it was too big, too heavy and too slow.
>
> But let's not let reality intrude into our happy little fantasy game.
Which Scottish claymore, though? There are three distinct weapons called
"claymore" at different periods in Scottish history -- a medieval two-
handed sword, a Renaissance two-handed sword... and a one-handed saber
used in the 1700's and 1800's. The two-handed versions are the best
known, but references to "claymores" used on horseback are most likely to
the saber -- the saber being a popular cavalry weapon during the 18th and
19th centuries, after all.
--
|\ _,,,---,,_ Travis S. Casey <efi...@earthlink.net>
ZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ No one agrees with me. Not even me.
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_)
Robin Lim
<hnei...@accessweb.com> wrote in message
news:399e1303...@news.ACCESSWEB.COM...
>
> The Scottish Claymore (definitely a 2 handed sword) was designed for
> use on horseback. Although its haft is big enough for two hands, the
> rider would normally hold the reins with one hand and the sword in the
> other. Rather than the swing of the weilder's arm, most damage
> resulted from the swoop of the sword downwards, and the momentum
> imparted by the horse.
>
> The two handed sword (or, at least, the Scottish version) was rarely
> used off horseback - it was too big, too heavy and too slow.
>
> But let's not let reality intrude into our happy little fantasy game.
*rubs hands together with glee*
Good. I finally have the justification I need for using my PCs' two-hander
from horseback :)
Rob
Rob Bruce
<grimb...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8nguq3$uv5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <QWIm5.8560$KD1....@news1.atl>,
> "Hari the Monk" <bb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > The answer would be yes. This is because the DnD system is too abstract
to
> > take into consideration 'real world' mechanics. If 'real world'
mechanics
> > were taken into account, there wouldn't be anything but Fighters and
Rogues.
> >
> > Hari the Monk
> >
> what would be abstract about the DM going : "no you nedd two hands and
> you can't control your mount and swing the weapon the way you have to use
> it ". It is clearly a two handed slashing weapon, and yes i don't know
> the page # in a book where it says "Hey stupid you can't use a big two
> minatures out there with guys riding around sporting what would have to
> be greatswords ".
>
So then how does one use a lance and shied combination? Kn ees are used for
control if I remember correctly with saddles constructed specifically for
the job.
Also horsback archers, take the good ones like the Mongols for instance.
Not that I'd be keen to see a greatsword on horseback but simply saying "2
hands on weapon, no jands on horse is a no no" is NOT the right answer.
Rob
Rob Bruce
john v verkuilen <ja...@uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:cSYm5.1167$9N1....@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu...
> grimb...@my-deja.com writes:
>
> >handed slashing weapon from the back of a mount, even though there are
> >minatures out there with guys riding around sporting what would have to
> >be greatswords ".
>
CYNIC!
HERETIC!
Of course I have 3 foot wings standing tall from my helmet...............
Rob
hnei...@accessweb.com
wrote:
>hnei...@accessweb.com (hnei...@accessweb.com) wrote...
>
>> The Scottish Claymore (definitely a 2 handed sword) was designed for
>> use on horseback. Although its haft is big enough for two hands, the
>> rider would normally hold the reins with one hand and the sword in the
>> other. Rather than the swing of the weilder's arm, most damage
>> resulted from the swoop of the sword downwards, and the momentum
>> imparted by the horse.
>>
>> The two handed sword (or, at least, the Scottish version) was rarely
>> used off horseback - it was too big, too heavy and too slow.
>>
>> But let's not let reality intrude into our happy little fantasy game.
>
>Which Scottish claymore, though? There are three distinct weapons called
>"claymore" at different periods in Scottish history -- a medieval two-
>handed sword, a Renaissance two-handed sword... and a one-handed saber
>used in the 1700's and 1800's. The two-handed versions are the best
>known, but references to "claymores" used on horseback are most likely to
>the saber -- the saber being a popular cavalry weapon during the 18th and
>19th centuries, after all.
First off, I'm not going from reference materials. This was an item I
viewed at a Scottish castle. I was looking at it and discussing it
with my wife (also a gamer) when one of the historical custodians
walked up to us and told us the historical usage of the question.
This was definitely not a one-handed saber. The weapn (tip of blade
to end of haft) may not have been a full six feet, but very close. I
could have had three hands and still not used up the full haft. I
make the weight at 20 to 30 pounds - I could lift it, but I would have
been hard pressed to hold it straight, much less swing it. Holding it
over the head, and arcing it down from horseback, would have been the
more efficient style.
Based on the style of the weapon itself, I'd say the item in question
was a medeival weapon, but renaissance would not have been out of the
question. There were several, in different styles, but all in the
same size range.
As an aside, the sword used by William Wallace ("Braveheart") was a
definite two handed sword. Historians put him at a minimum 6' 6" to
have used it effectively - it was a good six feet. The original (they
believe) is at the Wallace Monument, where I viewed it.
grimb...@my-deja.com
"Rob Bruce" <robb...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> <grimb...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:8nguq3$uv5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > In article <QWIm5.8560$KD1....@news1.atl>,
> > "Hari the Monk" <bb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > The answer would be yes. This is because the DnD system is too
abstract
> to
> > > take into consideration 'real world' mechanics. If 'real world'
> mechanics
> > > were taken into account, there wouldn't be anything but Fighters
and
> Rogues.
> > >
> > > Hari the Monk
> > >
> > what would be abstract about the DM going : "no you nedd two hands
and
> > you can't control your mount and swing the weapon the way you have
to use
> > it ". It is clearly a two handed slashing weapon, and yes i don't
know
> > the page # in a book where it says "Hey stupid you can't use a big
two
are
> > minatures out there with guys riding around sporting what would have
to
> > be greatswords ".
> >
>
used for
> control if I remember correctly with saddles constructed specifically
for
> the job.
>
> Also horsback archers, take the good ones like the Mongols for
instance.
>
> Not that I'd be keen to see a greatsword on horseback but simply
saying "2
> hands on weapon, no jands on horse is a no no" is NOT the right
answer.
>
> Rob
>
no" since the stance required to swing a geat sword isn't the same as
using a shield and lance (which the shield hand may optionally hold the
reigns ), the horse archer himself has an entirely different postion as
the traditonal lancer. Throughout lots of mounted combat the lance was
used in 2 hand grip by peoples that hadn't thought up the stirrup yet.
Lance and shield was very difficult without the stirrups and i'd guess a
two handed swung weapon would be even harder to use under those
conditions.
Also knees for control can work great on a light riding horse but get
tricky through blanket , saddle
mark...@io.com
question: the sarmatians of ancient russia used huge staight swords. they
fought almost exclusively on horseback.
using a greatsword from horseback seems impossible to me, but then again
i'm a 21st century game nerd. the sarmatians are fairly obscure in the
west, so it's reasonable that few DMs or WoTC writers know about this.
Paul MacDonald
Heels, spurs. My horse is quite amenable to being directed by
heel/lower leg contact alone. That said, a great sword can be used
from horseback in a number of ways that only require one hand. It can
be couched like a short lance to allow the horses momentum to drive
the point home. I don't think I'd want to face someone with a full
lance that way, but it might be an option vs. someone with a shorter
weapon. The greatsword also makes a reasonably useful spear to be
used against enemies on the ground. The sword is used single handed
with the hand holding the sword facing palm down close to the hilt or
on the ricasso, the grip braced against the forearm and the pommel
extending past the elbow. I can frequently spit fallen apples that
way. Important safety note: Getting the point stuck is a serious
bummer and is likely to result in a broken wrist or arm ( I got away
with a severe sprain). Another option is to swing the sword single
handed allowing the horses momentum to speed the blow.
Realistically, none of these methods make optimum use of the weapon.
The first two would at best work like a spear with a -1 (or worse) to
hit, the last as a long sword also with a -1 to hit. The lance method
is supposedly historical but, that aside, Rutger Hauer used a
two-hander from horseback in Ladyhawke. What further justification
is needed?
Paul MacDonald
Anivair
>question: the sarmatians of ancient russia used huge staight swords. they
>fought almost exclusively on horseback.
Were they fighting other people who are also on horseback? If so, then it's a
moot point, raelly, because it'd be almost exactly like fighting on the ground
(well. . . comparatively). If they were fighting people who were on th ground,
then i feel realy sorry for their backs and their horses. I wonder what tyype
of opposition they had? I mean, fighting a peasant with no weapons from
horseack is one thing. Of course, unwieldy hasn't stopped people from doing
things from horseback in the past. Anyone seen polo? Those mallets are
unwieldy as hell.
--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com
grimb...@my-deja.com
doing something so foolish, of course I'm a little crueler in the
penalties then you are but that is just style.
and as for movies as a reality check, Rutgers sowrd was a prop,no one
was trying to hurt anyone in realife during the filming of Ladyhawke.
also modern action games sure are fun when someone is a rambo fan: "What
do you mean i can't outrun the air-fuel bomb !!!"
Then again "Cinematic Action" is a cool game world buzz word isn''t it?
grimb...@my-deja.com
mark...@io.com wrote:
> now that i've heard a few good responses, i'll reveal the source of my
> question: the sarmatians of ancient russia used huge staight swords. they
> fought almost exclusively on horseback.
>
> i'm a 21st century game nerd. the sarmatians are fairly obscure in the
> west, so it's reasonable that few DMs or WoTC writers know about this.
>
> --
> mark...@io.com
>
I'd guess they dismounted to use the swords for upclose fighting and used
bows and javelins from horseback to soften and haras the enemy before
commiting to general melee. Also how big were the swords? If they are
huge in comaprisson to a shortsword they might not actually qualify a a
true greatsword. I know several of romes enemies from southern russia
preferd to do the serious fighting on foot while continously harrying the
romans with auxiliary cavalry and a main force that could quickly remount
and get away.
I'm not sure if the Dacians used horses much in battle ( they were in the
right area to do so) but they are famous for really big swords which were
employed while standing on the ground not mounted.
Paul MacDonald
Kinda the point I wanted to make. I hope I didn't fail entirely. A
smiley might've helped. I may be stupid enough to experiment with
pointy objects but I'm not going to go as far as live fire trials to
validate them. If a player can convince me that something should be
possible (out of game. During is no time for arguements) I'll let
them give it a try with whatever negative modifiers I choose to
include.
Paul MacDonald
Chad Lubrecht
>
> >now that i've heard a few good responses, i'll reveal the source of my
> >question: the sarmatians of ancient russia used huge staight swords. they
> >fought almost exclusively on horseback.
>
> Were they fighting other people who are also on horseback? If so, then it's a
> moot point, raelly, because it'd be almost exactly like fighting on the ground
> (well. . . comparatively).
Well, you do have to worry about that horsehead in front of you.
If you accidentally cut that off, you're in a bit of trouble.
grimb...@my-deja.com
The claymore is one of the most recognizable swords in history. A
uniquely Scottish hand-and-a-half style of sword, first appearing at the
beginning of the sixteenth Century, it is almost certainly a development
of the Scots-Irish single hand style of sword. Shorter
and lighter, in general, than the continental Two-Hander, the average
Claymore ran about 55 inches in over all length, with a 13 inch grip and
a 42 inch blade.Fairly uniform in style, the sword was set with a wheel
pommel often capped by a crescent shaped nut and a guard with straight,
down sloping arms ending in quatrefoils and langets running down the
center of the blade from the guard. Every able bodied man in the
Highlands carried arms,
as can be attested to by John Hume in the passage below written on his
experience as a
prisoner after the battle of Falkirk (1746). " Thy [the Highlanders]
always appeared like
warriors; as if their arms [weapons] had been limbs and members of their
bodies they were
never seen without them; they travelled, they attended fairs and markets,
nay they went to
church with their broadswords and dirks; " We have chosen a new claymore
to replicate which falls closer to the average size of the early examples
of this style of sword.
Original: c. First half 16th Century, National Museum of Antiquities of
Scotland.
Blade Length: 42.5" x 2.0625" Overall Length: 58.5" Wt 5:4
this is from www.armor.com , admitedly they can make mistakes as well
but a lot of the descriptions of weapons and examples they give hold up
with what I've read in other sources.
grimb...@my-deja.com
hnei...@accessweb.com
The Scottish claymore used from horseback was used one-handed and
generally swung down, to the side of the horse. The momentum of the
horse, generally combined with gravity, effectively replaced the force
which would require 2 hands to generate on the ground. The horse
would not be in any danger with such an arc.
The imoage of someone riding on horseback waving a 2 handed sword
wildly about in circles is amusing, but not practical.
Rob Bruce
<grimb...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8npg71$ai6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <3bRn5.3394$Vb.8...@ozemail.com.au>,
> "Rob Bruce" <robb...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > <grimb...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > news:8nguq3$uv5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > In article <QWIm5.8560$KD1....@news1.atl>,
> > > "Hari the Monk" <bb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Not that I'd be keen to see a greatsword on horseback but simply
> saying "2
> > hands on weapon, no jands on horse is a no no" is NOT the right
> answer.
> >
> > Rob
> >
> you are mostly right. but a 2 hand swung weapon should cetainly be a "no
> no" since the stance required to swing a geat sword isn't the same as
> using a shield and lance (which the shield hand may optionally hold the
> reigns ), the horse archer himself has an entirely different postion as
> the traditonal lancer. Throughout lots of mounted combat the lance was
> used in 2 hand grip by peoples that hadn't thought up the stirrup yet.
> Lance and shield was very difficult without the stirrups and i'd guess a
> two handed swung weapon would be even harder to use under those
> conditions.
Agree with you all the way through but "what if" you made a special saddle
to facilitate the act? Something that holds you in place, protects to horse
from momentum overswing etc. Lots of downsides (like how the hell do you
get out of it if your horse is killed) but it should be technically possibel
in some way. Whether the benefits outweigh the negatives is another matter
of course..............
>
> Also knees for control can work great on a light riding horse but get
> tricky through blanket , saddle
Some memory is tickling the back of my head where saddles had a paddle like
thing that amplified knee movement. Could be wrong and I have no source to
verify it but it could be possible. Especially in a world with magic.
Rob
grimb...@my-deja.com
I'd say a custom saddle might help the user out but that is really going
out of the way just to avoid using a lance in favor of a greatsword.
In 2nd and 3E dnd a lance will probably do more damage then a greatsword
anyway.
As for the paddle like thing, it makes something tick in the back of my
head, I think mongol but I'm not sure, if that is the origin I'd say it
is certainly there for use by a horse archer and not a maniac
greatswordsman equestrian.