Getting rid of weapons inspired by Star Wars Episode 1

103 posts / 0 new
Last post
Please tell me the double bladed sword, double axe, and dire flail are going bye bye. Putting them in the game to make two weapon fighting more balanced is frankly sad. In all of our history these are the only weapons in the game that never existed before hollywood (except for the epee and nunchaku). Don't get me wrong I like cinematic combat but these weapons push the edge of stupid (don't even get me started with the epee and nunchaku).
It's been pointed out in similar threads to this that a weapon similar to the dire flail did, in fact, exist in India.

Also, not everyone wants to be precisely historically accurate with their weapons. It's intended to be a fantasy game, after all, not a historical warfare simulation. If your group doesn't want to use these weapons, then your group won't. If someone else's group does want to use them, the option will be there. Removing them from the game wouldn't help your experience as much as it would hurt theirs.
Rhymes with Bruce
It's been pointed out in similar threads to this that a weapon similar to the dire flail did, in fact, exist in India.

Also, not everyone wants to be precisely historically accurate with their weapons. It's intended to be a fantasy game, after all, not a historical warfare simulation. If your group doesn't want to use these weapons, then your group won't. If someone else's group does want to use them, the option will be there. Removing them from the game wouldn't help your experience as much as it would hurt theirs.

Like I said before, I like cinematic combat. But let's assume I'm from Missourri and show me the dire flail. If it existed there should be a resource from the net with a picture of it and it's historical signifigance. I'd appreciate any help here.
Like I said before, I like cinematic combat. But let's assume I'm from Missourri and show me the dire flail. If it existed there should be a resource from the net with a picture of it and it's historical signifigance. I'd appreciate any help here.

I can't find any images (outside of my Weapons: A Visual History book at home), but there are citations; http://books.google.com/books?id=J5PgapzD6FoC&pg=PA198&lpg=PA198&dq=indian+weapons+%22cumber+jung%22&source=web&ots=HSIvzDtJDG&sig=G-Qdn2UdnhTmUPmDhNdEA3BwWpY.

It's the Cumber-Jung. And it is double-ended.
Like I said before, I like cinematic combat. But let's assume I'm from Missourri and show me the dire flail. If it existed there should be a resource from the net with a picture of it and it's historical signifigance. I'd appreciate any help here.

I am from Missouri, and I don't give a crap if it really existed or not. :D It doesn't matter. D&D is not a historical simulation, so therefore it does not matter if the weapon didn't exist in the real world, because D&D is not the real world.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Actually the cumber-jung sounds like a two-headed flail rather than a double-ended flail. Both heads came from the same end of the handle, I believe. The one image and descriptions I was able to find of it points toward the single-ended design.

The closest thing to the dire flail I'm aware of is the three-section staff, but you can hold all sections which allows the weapon to actually, you know, be used.
Actually the cumber-jung sounds like a two-headed flail rather than a double-ended flail. Both heads came from the same end of the handle, I believe. The one image and descriptions I was able to find of it points toward the single-ended design.

The closest thing to the dire flail I'm aware of is the three-section staff, but you can hold all sections which allows the weapon to actually, you know, be used.

Thank you:
Actually the cumber-jung sounds like a two-headed flail rather than a double-ended flail. Both heads came from the same end of the handle, I believe. The one image and descriptions I was able to find of it points toward the single-ended design.

There are double-ended cumber-jungs. If you ever see the book "Weapon: An illustrated history" there's a double-ended photograph, on page 143 I believe.

I havn't been able to find the same photograph online, however.
Please tell me the double bladed sword, double axe, and dire flail are going bye bye. Putting them in the game to make two weapon fighting more balanced is frankly sad. In all of our history these are the only weapons in the game that never existed before hollywood (except for the epee and nunchaku). Don't get me wrong I like cinematic combat but these weapons push the edge of stupid (don't even get me started with the epee and nunchaku).

I agree with you.

That said, It is just easier to have them in for those who want them and let others remove them. Do not get me started on how much D&D 3th ed weapons do not fit in any way to real life historical arms. :fight!:
There are double-ended cumber-jungs. If you ever see the book "Weapon: An illustrated history" there's a double-ended photograph, on page 143 I believe.

I havn't been able to find the same photograph online, however.

Are the flail chains really short? How long is the connecting bar, is it possible it is meant to be swung with one hand? I just have trouble envisioning being able to swing such a weapon with both hands without hitting oneself. I'll have to see if I can find that picture.

I know weird weapons existed (like the trombash), but the dire flail just appears so impractical that I'm incredulous.
Are the flail chains really short? How long is the connecting bar, is it possible it is meant to be swung with one hand? I just have trouble envisioning being able to swing such a weapon with both hands without hitting oneself. I'll have to see if I can find that picture.

I know weird weapons existed (like the trombash), but the dire flail just appears so impractical that I'm incredulous.

It's probably a parrying weapon, as the shaft is 181/2 inches long and the chains look like they're about a foot long, with 4 inch quoit heads wrapped in some kind of textile, leaving only the circular blade exposed.

ETA: At least we're not discussing Lantern Shields or Urumi.
Are the flail chains really short? How long is the connecting bar, is it possible it is meant to be swung with one hand? I just have trouble envisioning being able to swing such a weapon with both hands without hitting oneself. I'll have to see if I can find that picture.

I know weird weapons existed (like the trombash), but the dire flail just appears so impractical that I'm incredulous.

I just think of the dire flail as being a full 5-6' haft with small chain ending in the ball. And what's in the PH is just bad art. That way I can at least visualize it being used without hurting one self.
I just think of the dire flail as being a full 5-6' haft with small chain ending in the ball. And what's in the PH is just bad art. That way I can at least visualize it being used without hurting one self.

It takes some practice to use some of the neater historicle weapons without hurting yourself.

It's very easy to crack your own skull with a Flail or a Sling.

Bows will usually leave your wrist bloody and raw.

Actually using a Sword will tear up your palm.

These weapons do appear impracticle. But in effect are far less ridiculous in combat then say a Greatsword.

If you can accept Greatswords not being useless in combat then it's not that much more of an exageration to accept things like the Two-Bladed Sword and the Double-Headed Axe.
@Dragom: Greatswords are ridiculous in combat? How so?
It takes some practice to use some of the neater historicle weapons without hurting yourself.

It's very easy to crack your own skull with a Flail or a Sling.

It's also very easy to avoid with a Flail. Not quite as easy as with a mace, but pretty easy.

Bows will usually leave your wrist bloody and raw.

Which is why most archers still use wristguards :D.

Actually using a Sword will tear up your palm.

Never happened to me...I try to use gloves, though, which is generally a good idea.

These weapons do appear impracticle. But in effect are far less ridiculous in combat then say a Greatsword.

If you can accept Greatswords not being useless in combat then it's not that much more of an exageration to accept things like the Two-Bladed Sword and the Double-Headed Axe.

Landskenechts. Specifically, the Doppelsoldners. They used zweihanders on 16th century battlefields.

Couldn't be all that ridiculous.
@Dragom: Greatswords are ridiculous in combat? How so?

Greatswords, or more accurately zweilhanders, flamberge, larger claymores and zanbattou sword were not used like big bladed baseball bats as they are depicted in a lot of modern art. Zanbattou and zweilhanders were more like polearms where the user held the weapons very far on their exceptionally long handles.
Flamberge and claymores were actually made to be used with one hand on the grip, the other on the blade itself.

Neither fighting style is anything like how they are depicted in art.

It's also very easy to avoid with a Flail. Not quite as easy as with a mace, but pretty easy.

I'd say, from my sca experience, its the complete the opposite. Maces are a lot easier to not hurt yourself with.

Which is why most archers still use wristguards :D.

Never happened to me...I try to use gloves, though, which is generally a good idea.

Obviously if you wear decent portection, its not going to be a problem.

Landskenechts. Specifically, the Doppelsoldners. They used zweihanders on 16th century battlefields.

The fighting style used it nothing like how the weapon usage is depicted in fantasy art.
I'd say, from my sca experience, its the complete the opposite. Maces are a lot easier to not hurt yourself with.

Reread my statement again; it's easy to avoid beaning yourself with a flail, and even easier with a mace.

Obviously if you wear decent portection, its not going to be a problem.

Not gauntlets, just regular gloves. I have more problems with sweat than grip on a sword.

The fighting style used it nothing like how the weapon usage is depicted in fantasy art.

And? That doesn't make the weapon ridiculous.
The two-handed style sword wasn't something that was ever embraced by a successful military.

And thinking about the actual weapon... It wouldn't be difficult or demand any real skill to just step into the swing countering the 4 feet of leverage and hoping the thing didn't cut to far into your mailed and possibly plated shoulders and disembowel the swordsman with a glorified eating utensil.
Yes. Since you saw star wars episode 1 before you played D&D, it most obviously was inspired by star wars episode 1, and could never have been inspired by anything else...

Order of personal experience does not necessarily equate to cause and effect. It happens to be that SW: Ep 1 did come out a year before 3rd edition, but that doesn't mean that it inspired the double weapons in 3rd.

As for double weapons, if you want to get rid of them, it's not that hard to ban them in your games, if you want to ridicule your fellow gamers for using them, you have the prerogative to be an ass, but I don't see much of a point in getting rid of weaponry unless there's a reason beyond "I perceived it as inspired by a movie."
The two-handed style sword wasn't something that was ever embraced by a successful military.

Other than the Japanese katana or tachi used throughout their history including during periods with and without use of armor, on and off of horseback, right?

Or the Swiss & German dopplehander or bidenhander used by infantrymen as part of anti-pikemen tactics the 1500s to 1600s?

Or maybe all of these other examples?

LordofNightmares and Kurokami know what they're talking about -- especially the way they were actually wielded in the European context, but you should be ashamed of yourself for forgetting the prominence of two-handed sword fighting in Japanese culture. It's their primary surviving weapon art.

And thinking about the actual weapon... It wouldn't be difficult or demand any real skill to just step into the swing countering the 4 feet of leverage and hoping the thing didn't cut to far into your mailed and possibly plated shoulders and disembowel the swordsman with a glorified eating utensil.

I don't want to be mean, but you've never actually practiced any sort of weapon-based martial art, have you? Swinging wildly is a good way to get impaled by someone using a weapon with similar reach (which is exactly who you'd be up against -- all weapons and armor evolved as a means of countering something that your enemies were using at the time). That's why a two-handed sword fighter is just as cautious in looking for an opening as anybody else.

Seriously, spend some time watching a kendo match. The rules and the lack of deadliness alter the way that people fight (especially with regard to guarding against a counter-hit after you've nailed your opponent), but the caution and the emphasis on getting an advantageous position and opening are just as relevant in a world where a hit puts you on the road to death. You don't want to get hit, and you learn to fight to avoid getting hit. Having a big choppy thingy doesn't change this fact at all.
And? That doesn't make the weapon ridiculous.

Depicting and describing the use of a weapon in a way that it cannot realistically be used as such is more than just ridiculous. Its perpetuating ignorance and a direct insult to the intellect of the readers/viewers.

LordofNightmares and Kurokami know what they're talking about -- especially the way they were actually wielded in the European context, but you should be ashamed of yourself for forgetting the prominence of two-handed sword fighting in Japanese culture. It's their primary surviving weapon art.

The usage of a katana or tachi has never never really been depicted in an insanely inaccurate manner, so it never crossed my mind.
Two-bladed swords existed. Popular weapons in Medieval Korea at various points. 'course, the handle was most of the weapon, and it was more like a shortstaff that had a dirk at each end than two normal swords glued to each other at the arse end of the grip, but yeah.
The usage of a katana or tachi has never never really been depicted in an insanely inaccurate manner, so it never crossed my mind.

Not you, him. There are still some surviving kenjutsu schools, though.
Depicting and describing the use of a weapon in a way that it cannot realistically be used as such is more than just ridiculous. Its perpetuating ignorance and a direct insult to the intellect of the readers/viewers.

This, however, does not make the weapon ridiculous, only those who think they know how it should be used.

Long swords, rapiers, and every single other European weapon are used incorrectly as well. I've only seen half-swording mentioned in Riddle of Steel.

The usage of a katana or tachi has never never really been depicted in an insanely inaccurate manner, so it never crossed my mind.

Other than the very obviously fake stuff with fire and flashyness, Mitsurugi from Soul Calibur uses his katana much like several schools of kenjutsu taught. The scenes for training in "The Last Samurai" were realistic, if the fighting wasn't. Several Japanese epics and action movies use the katana correctly (it's a mark of national pride for them). There's also one, and only one that I know of, surviving kenjutsu school, as well as several kendo school.
You guys might want to look into The Riddle of Steel. It's all about realistic depictions of combat and historically accurate weapons. D&D on the other hand, is not. It's not actually a very good game for historically accurate or realistic depictions of anything.
You guys might want to look into The Riddle of Steel. It's all about realistic depictions of combat and historically accurate weapons. D&D on the other hand, is not. It's not actually a very good game for historically accurate or realistic depictions of anything.

Really? So I can start kicking cats without living in fear? HURRAH!

Note that while I don't like cats, I don't actually advocate animal cruelty.
Other than the Japanese katana or tachi used throughout their history including during periods with and without use of armor, on and off of horseback, right?

A Katana isn't a Greatsword. It's sharp enough along it's entire length that thumb loss is a common injury during training.

A Greatsword is only all that sharp for about half of the blade.

The German Anti-Pike Squads are news to me though.
Other than the very obviously fake stuff with fire and flashyness, Mitsurugi from Soul Calibur uses his katana much like several schools of kenjutsu taught. The scenes for training in "The Last Samurai" were realistic, if the fighting wasn't. Several Japanese epics and action movies use the katana correctly (it's a mark of national pride for them). There's also one, and only one that I know of, surviving kenjutsu school, as well as several kendo school.

Thought there is only one currently taught style of kenjitsu, there are still many schools, I know of two in California (one in Frisco, outside of Los Angeles). The rest of the kenjitsu styles have been folded into kendo styles, but the nature of a do is far more broad in its teaching than a jitsu.

Its the current japophillia that is populating modern pop culture that is keeping the asian sword fighting styles alive. For every five people who are entertained by the over the top representations of the styles there will be one who will study into the history behind the fiction.
I´m surprised that the spiked chain as depicted in the books hasn´t been mentioned yet...
I´m surprised that the spiked chain as depicted in the books hasn´t been mentioned yet...

But long chain weapons are used in real world martial art styles.

I knew this chick when I lived in Hawaii in my Tang Soo Do class who was super-bad with a long chain-like weapon (forget the name), that she would whip all over the place (while tumbling).
But long chain weapons are used in real world martial art styles.

I knew this chick when I lived in Hawaii in my Tang Soo Do class who was super-bad with a long chain-like weapon (forget the name), that she would whip all over the place (while tumbling).

One thing is chain weapons, which I´m perfectly fine with. Another thing is the spiked chain as shown nowadays. Here´s an image.
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/dndcolumn_chain.jpg
One thing is chain weapons, which I´m perfectly fine with. Another thing is the spiked chain as shown nowadays. Here´s an image.
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/dndcolumn_chain.jpg

…Uh, yeah, I've managed to block images like that form my mind.

I totally agree that that weapon as shown is completely unwieldy and silly.
Thought there is only one currently taught style of kenjitsu, there are still many schools, I know of two in California (one in Frisco, outside of Los Angeles). The rest of the kenjitsu styles have been folded into kendo styles, but the nature of a do is far more broad in its teaching than a jitsu.

There are many dojo but only one ryuu. At least that I'm aware of. Kenjutsu, and any jutsu, generally doesn't survive tiems of peace (it's happened before in Japanese history) as -jutsu is a 'war' art, a pragmatic martial art designed for killing people. Arts labeled -do are more sport-like, more about philosophy and exercise.

Its the current japophillia that is populating modern pop culture that is keeping the asian sword fighting styles alive. For every five people who are entertained by the over the top representations of the styles there will be one who will study into the history behind the fiction.

This has more to do with the movies made than anything. I bet a real "EuroFantasy" would be a great way to get people into European sword styles if they use the swords like the Europeans actually did.
A Katana isn't a Greatsword. It's sharp enough along it's entire length that thumb loss is a common injury during training.

A Greatsword is only all that sharp for about half of the blade.

That's largely irrelevant to your statement that "[the] two-handed style sword wasn't something that was ever embraced by a successful military." It was embraced by the Japanese (and others).

Also, the katana as we know it today is a weapon optimized for use against unarmored opponents -- hence the sharpness. Weapons with a fine edge will suffer great wear and tear against armored opponents. The katana's predecessor, the tachi, was a duller edged weapon meant to go up against armored foes, and the average tachi was longer and larger than the average katana. Several tachi variants also have a very long hilt intended to be gripped in much the same place that European two-handed swords were along the unsharpened blade.

Much like in Europe, though, spears were favored against armored opponents, but two handed swords were definitely not unknown on the battlefield.
Also, the katana as we know it today is a weapon optimized for use against unarmored opponents -- hence the sharpness. Weapons with a fine edge will suffer great wear and tear against armored opponents. The katana's predecessor, the tachi, was a duller edged weapon meant to go up against armored foes, and the average tachi was longer and larger than the average katana. Several tachi variants also have a very long hilt intended to be gripped in much the same place that European two-handed swords were along the unsharpened blade.

Actually, the tachi's hilt was for easier use from horseback. Its curve and drawing position were all for use from horseback.

Samurai in the era of the tachi weren't swordsmen, they were mounted archers (and the kyo, or compound bow, was always considered integral to a proper samurai's training). The katana was designed to be used against men in armor as well (perhaps not the modern, Tokugawa-era katana, but the 'katana' pattern nonetheless), just not the heavy full-plate of the Europeans. Generally the Japanese, at most, had one 'pot-bellied' breastplate with lamelar, leather, and maille making up the rest of their armor.

The best swords to compare to European two-handed swords would be odachi, nodachi, and zanbatou. They were used (if not that often, due to how expensive they were) and there are several tales of great samurai who used their great long swords on the battlefields during the sengoku period and earlier.
I'm honestly amazed that I'm still the only person to bring up real double-bladed swords.

...Though I hear they were about as useful in real life as they are in D&D to a min-maxer.
I'm honestly amazed that I'm still the only person to bring up real double-bladed swords.

...Though I hear they were about as useful in real life as they are in D&D to a min-maxer.

If I remember right, you mentioned double-spears from Korea. So far as I know, nothing exists like the double swords in D&D (where the blade makes up the majority of the length) or even the more logical double-scimitar (I can at least see a functional style built on that).
It's probably a parrying weapon, as the shaft is 181/2 inches long and the chains look like they're about a foot long, with 4 inch quoit heads wrapped in some kind of textile, leaving only the circular blade exposed.

ETA: At least we're not discussing Lantern Shields or Urumi.

Hmm, I wonder if one of the quoits was held in hand with the shaft in the other hand. That way you had a length of chain to entangle with or parry as well as a flail and a circular punching blade. You also wouldn't hit yourself with a free-swinging end.

Speaking of urumi, they have the spinning sword in Secrets of Sarlona. With terrible artwork of course.
If I remember right, you mentioned double-spears from Korea. So far as I know, nothing exists like the double swords in D&D (where the blade makes up the majority of the length) or even the more logical double-scimitar (I can at least see a functional style built on that).

The museum (and my mother, who is native) referred to them as double-bladed swords, and this was years before SW:E1. The blade was also a bit long for what I usually associate with spears - not that there aren't long-bladed spears.

I've seen double scimitars in other fantasy before, they look rather cool, not sure where they originated. My first memory of the concept is Thundercats, on new Thundara. It was the Mutant King (who was a rat) fighting Jaga in a flashback... I remember thinking it was totally badass. Except I didn't know such language, so it was more like "THAT'TH AWETHOME!!!!1!one"
The museum (and my mother, who is native) referred to them as double-bladed swords, and this was years before SW:E1. The blade was also a bit long for what I usually associate with spears - not that there aren't long-bladed spears.

I wouldn't call them swords necessarily, but I'm sure that, like naginata in Japan, they're basically just long-hafted swords. I think I've seen the weapons you're talking about, but if I have, they're related to the Chinese dadao (pretty sure it's the dadao), which is a really large cleaver on a four foot staff. It's not quite what the 3.x PHB has as an example of a two-bladed sword.

I've seen double scimitars in other fantasy before, they look rather cool, not sure where they originated. My first memory of the concept is Thundercats, on new Thundara. It was the Mutant King (who was a rat) fighting Jaga in a flashback... I remember thinking it was totally badass. Except I didn't know such language, so it was more like "THAT'TH AWETHOME!!!!1!one"

I havn't seen it that often, but whenever I look at doublebladed swords, double-ended scimitars, katanas, tachis, and other curved slashing swords always made more sense for that than straight cut and thrust swords.
Hmm, I wonder if one of the quoits was held in hand with the shaft in the other hand. That way you had a length of chain to entangle with or parry as well as a flail and a circular punching blade. You also wouldn't hit yourself with a free-swinging end.

Wouldn't make sense. Quoit is another name for a chakram from what I can tell. It's a sharp metal ring with a textile around it. It'd be very, very awkward.

Speaking of urumi, they have the spinning sword in Secrets of Sarlona. With terrible artwork of course.

Secrets of what now? I'm unfamiliar with this thing you speak of :P.