Does this weapon design sound bad to anyone?

[Deleted member 54065]

They did in the past. Though since the rest of the continent started trading with them they started using metals rather than bones.

Thank you for the reference. You are a very diligent teacher.

That seems to be the consensus.

Anytime!

 

[CarburetorThompson]

I wanted to sharpen the back edge so that it would act more like a scythe during a cavalry charge. However, if the shaft is broken then it could be used as a classic scimitar.

I believe it’s hard to get good edge alignment with sickles/scythe shapes, but I don’t think that will be a problem since it’s a weapon for an elite soldier and not the standard issue. Personally I think seeing the wood on the blade would be cool, but that’s just aesthetics.

 

[Reborn_Cat]

That seems to be the consensus.

I mean you can't have lightweight and durable for something like that to exist in a realistic setting. That's why bones are great as once they break they can be replaced easier than a metal coating and the jagged parts of the broken can be used to cause some pain to an unarmored or partially armored opponent even if it can't kill them

 

[Representing_Tromba]

I mean you can't have lightweight and durable for something like that to exist in a realistic setting. That's why bones are great as once they break they can be replaced easier than a metal coating and the jagged parts of the broken can be used to cause some pain to an unarmored or partially armored opponent even if it can't kill them

Yeah. The practicality of it is pretty bad. I was trying to make it as lightweight as possible to make it actually usable since Berserk physics doesn't work in this world. The tungsten would be heavy enough just in the blade alone to count as a fairly heavy weapon. I'll try some other ideas.

 

[NotaNuffian]

War scythe

Ya I know, but too late to change.

They did in the past. Though since the rest of the continent started trading with them they started using metals rather than bones.

Thank you for the reference. You are a very diligent teacher.

That seems to be the consensus.

Tungsten my friend. Go watch Game Theory about diamond weapons in minecraft.

 

[Representing_Tromba]

@2021 @NotaNuffian @Nairo @Hans.Trondheim @T.K._Paradox @CarburetorThompson @Reborn_Cat @SailusGebel How does this sound now that I've received some advice.

An 8-foot wooden shaft with a steel sickle on one end and a spearhead-like sea serpent bone as hard as metal on the other end. The shaft has been coated in a strengthening polish and both ends of the shaft are bound tightly with metal string.

 

[2021]

@2021 @NotaNuffian @Nairo @Hans.Trondheim @T.K._Paradox @CarburetorThompson @Reborn_Cat @SailusGebel How does this sound now that I've received some advice.

An 8-foot wooden shaft with a steel sickle on one end and a spearhead-like sea serpent bone as hard as metal on the other end. The shaft has been coated in a strengthening polish and both ends of the shaft are bound tightly with metal string.

Pretty good

 

[CarburetorThompson]

@2021 @NotaNuffian @Nairo @Hans.Trondheim @T.K._Paradox @CarburetorThompson @Reborn_Cat @SailusGebel How does this sound now that I've received some advice.

An 8-foot wooden shaft with a steel sickle on one end and a spearhead-like sea serpent bone as hard as metal on the other end. The shaft has been coated in a strengthening polish and both ends of the shaft are bound tightly with metal string.

Honestly I think the original is fine. If it was up to me I’d maybe shorten it slightly for unmounted use, and lose the counter weight since the original design lends itself to being light. Still though I think it’s fine as is.

 

[2021]

Sus

 

[Irl_Rat]

@2021 @NotaNuffian @Nairo @Hans.Trondheim @T.K._Paradox @CarburetorThompson @Reborn_Cat @SailusGebel How does this sound now that I've received some advice.

An 8-foot wooden shaft with a steel sickle on one end and a spearhead-like sea serpent bone as hard as metal on the other end. The shaft has been coated in a strengthening polish and both ends of the shaft are bound tightly with metal string.

Gonna be honest, war scythes are kinda shit weapons. I would personally have kept the weapon as a sort of blunt glaive and maybe added another spike on the head for utility. Keep the butt spike or put something there for counterbalance. Most poleweapons need either a counterbalance or to have the shaft taper with the butt end quite thicker and heavier. Because head heavy weapons, while effective for one hit, are ridiculously unwieldy and would be a complete detriment if you didn't oneshot your opponent.

The reason the falx worked well was because it had quite the optimal length. See, the armor piercing quality of the falx wasn't the cutting power, it was that nasty curved point on the top. Since the blade was curved and reasonably long, the point went over a shield and right into a helmet. Meanwhile the blade could hack into a scutum with relative effectiveness. However, the main danger was the curved point that the Romans had to add ridges on their helmet. See, the falx had two very similar relatives: the sica and the rhomphaia. The sica was a one handed falx and commonly used by Balkan warriors of antiquity, I think it was invented by the Illyrians. The rhomphaia was a straight falx essentially and was almost solely used by the Thracians. Notice how the Romans have fought against both the Illyrians and Thracians but didn't go crying to their Emperor about "nerf sica/rhomphaia." Therefore, the falx's design was optimal for going over shields and punching into someone's helmet. While a war scythe COULD do this, it would be so much more difficult to do so with that extra length since the wielder has much less finesse, also affected by the way both weapons will be gripped differently. Like how chopsticks will get harder to use if you make them longer.

I guess part of the reason the sica and rhomphaia weren't an issue to the romans was also because the Dacians were extremely advanced in regards to metalworking. So a much larger portion of their forces actually had falxes compared to how rhompaias were still quite rare among Thracians, mainly employed by wealthy warriors fighting as elite shock troops.

 

[Representing_Tromba]

Gonna be honest, war scythes are kinda shit weapons. I would personally have kept the weapon as a sort of blunt glaive and maybe added another spike on the head for utility. Keep the butt spike or put something there for counterbalance. Most poleweapons need either a counterbalance or to have the shaft taper with the butt end quite thicker and heavier. Because head heavy weapons, while effective for one hit, are ridiculously unwieldy and would be a complete detriment if you didn't oneshot your opponent.

The reason the falx worked well was because it had quite the optimal length. See, the armor piercing quality of the falx wasn't the cutting power, it was that nasty curved point on the top. Since the blade was curved and reasonably long, the point went over a shield and right into a helmet. Meanwhile the blade could hack into a scutum with relative effectiveness. However, the main danger was the curved point that the Romans had to add ridges on their helmet. See, the falx had two very similar relatives: the sica and the rhomphaia. The sica was a one handed falx and commonly used by Balkan warriors of antiquity, I think it was invented by the Illyrians. The rhomphaia was a straight falx essentially and was almost solely used by the Thracians. Notice how the Romans have fought against both the Illyrians and Thracians but didn't go crying to their Emperor about "nerf sica/rhomphaia." Therefore, the falx's design was optimal for going over shields and punching into someone's helmet. While a war scythe COULD do this, it would be so much more difficult to do so with that extra length since the wielder has much less finesse, also affected by the way both weapons will be gripped differently. Like how chopsticks will get harder to use if you make them longer.

I guess part of the reason the sica and rhomphaia weren't an issue to the romans was also because the Dacians were extremely advanced in regards to metalworking. So a much larger portion of their forces actually had falxes compared to how rhompaias were still quite rare among Thracians, mainly employed by wealthy warriors fighting as elite shock troops.

Alright. I get where this is coming from. I think that the way I will describe it in the story is similar to the falx but have the bone spearhead on the other end so that it can be both a spear and a mid-range falx-like weapon. Since the character is the only one who uses this weapon and he is an elite soldier it should work out well. Perhaps I shall make it a bit shorter though. Maybe, 6 feet long.

 

[T.K._Paradox]

@2021 @NotaNuffian @Nairo @Hans.Trondheim @T.K._Paradox @CarburetorThompson @Reborn_Cat @SailusGebel How does this sound now that I've received some advice.

An 8-foot wooden shaft with a steel sickle on one end and a spearhead-like sea serpent bone as hard as metal on the other end. The shaft has been coated in a strengthening polish and both ends of the shaft are bound tightly with metal string.

I like it.

It sounds like a fairly decent weapon all things considered, and it makes me think of a khopesh-esque polearm.

If you want more realism shorten the shaft length probably to like 5 1/2 to 6ft for infantry and you're good to go.

But in the end I am excited to see how this weapons is used in your story.

 

[Representing_Tromba]

I like it.

It sounds like a fairly decent weapon all things considered, and it makes me think of a khopesh-esque polearm.

If you want more realism shorten the shaft length probably to like 5 1/2 to 6ft for infantry and you're good to go.

But in the end I am excited to see how this weapons is used in your story.

Alright. many people say I should shorten it so I think I will.

 

[ConansWitchBaby]

You can add a small rivet that you can pry off either end to get a short-ranged weapon in a pinch.

So it can help with the range dilemna.

 

[Representing_Tromba]

You can add a small rivet that you can pry off either end to get a short-ranged weapon in a pinch.

So it can help with the range dilemna.

That's a great idea.

 

[Jemini]

It's an 8 foot long (2.4 meter) spear-like weapon but with a thick wooden scimitar-like blade on one end. The wooden blade is coated in the strongest metal that can be found (tungsten) and sharpened on both sides of the blade. On the other end of the staff is a spiked metal counterweight that makes the weapon perfectly balanced in the center of the staff. It is usually used for cavalry attacks but is handy for ground combat as well. I think that this would be a hard weapon to master and that it would be fairly effective but I wanted a second opinion.

Ok. I think we should take this point by point.

1. 8 foot long (2.4 meter) spear-like weapon

Ok. There have been plenty of such weapons historically. This sounds fine. I should ask though. When you say 8 foot long, is that the shaft alone or does it count the head? Both designs exist historically, but which one you're going with would affect the rest of the evaluation. (I'll bring this up again when I get to the parts where it matters.)

2. scimitar-like blade on one end. (I decided to skip the wooden part down to #3).

Right. Let me stop you here. A scimitar curves WAY too much to take the directional stresses put on it by the extra torque of being handled as a pole-weapon. There are some scimitars out there that are curved at a level that's a little closer to a naginata, but if that's your justification then you might as well just call it a naginata.

3. The wooden blade is coated in the strongest metal that can be found (tungsten).

Now THIS one is tough. In fact, it's probably the largest point of difficulty on here.

1st off, Tungsten is actually HORRIBLE for use in weapon making specifically BECAUSE of how hard it is. Hard = will keep an edge better, but it's more brittle. In other words, tungsten will chip and break very easily due to it's lack of bendability.

The tough part here is the idea of it having a wooden core. A core made out of a softer material that has quite a bit of bend and give to it actually is a common technique used to counter-act the downsides of a brittle hard material. I'm really not sure wood is going to cut it though. It might be going a little too far in the other direction.

Yes, live green wood does bend. However, dead wood becomes brittle as well and breaks way too easily. And, as covered, the tungsten would also be brittle.

I would say this could work if you make the core of the blade out of steel or wrought-iron. (Iron with a carbon content lower than steel. It is soft, but also very bendy. Iron with a carbon content higher than steel is called cast iron, and it's hard and brittle. Steel is actually the term we give to iron that has it's carbon in that goldilocks zone where it's neither too hard or too soft.)

4. On the other end of the staff is a spiked metal counterweight that makes the weapon perfectly balanced in the center of the staff.

Ok. If it needs the counter-weight, I'm going to presume you really meant it when you said the blade was thick.

In terms of weapon performance, I would say it can still function effectively in combat. However, this does bring up one potential problem. How strong is the person wielding this weapon?

If you're talking a spear with a counter-weight, then that means it's definitely quite heavy. This will cause it to tire out the muscles of the person wielding it, making it unsuitable for long periods of combat. So, it won't really be usable for your common infantry or cavalry man.

However, if you're talking the spear-toting equivalent of the English longbowman (the hardest part about training archers is getting their arm and back strength up), then it's perfectly fine. Skeletons have been found in Europe and other areas where lances were used where their right arm was noticeably larger than the left, even with the skeletal remains. These career lancers would have likely been able to carry this weapon you're describing no problem.

5. It is usually used for cavalry attacks but is handy for ground combat as well.

Alright. Here's where we have our potential problems cropping up.

Exactly what kind of ground combat are we envisioning here? The weapon you described would function perfectly well on horseback, but I can see some problems in ground combat.

Because you described the counter-weight as being spiked before, I am guessing you meant for it to be used in a one-on-many combat situation? Well, I don't think you need me to tell you this really isn't how combat went historically. But, having two threatening edges to it like this probably could be useful in warding off a large number of enemies if you get knocked off your horse during a cavalry charge and need to ward people away for a moment so you can make a break for it and get back behind allied lines.

On the other end though, I'd be concerned about the spiked end harming the horse if you're using it primarily on horseback.

Also, this is the point where the 8 foot shaft Vs. 8 foot total length question comes into play. 8 foot is an alright length for a naginata in terms of total length, and would be considered perfectly balanced. However, if you're talking 8 foot shaft with a blade on top of that, then you are talking a weapon too long to be used in single ground combat.

Pole weapons of that length would commonly be used from the back ranks of pike charges, essentially pikemen with even longer pikes than the front rank would bring their pikes down between allied units in order to add more pointy sticks to the charge. It would be a weapon standardly used in group combat.

I think that this would be a hard weapon to master and that it would be fairly effective but I wanted a second opinion.

I don't hear anything outrageously bad about this thing, but the spiked counter-weight doesn't really strike me as something that would come of use in all that many realistic situations. Also, as mentioned, there's the very real risk of it injuring the horse. I do not see a weapon with that design as ever existing outside of a none-off novelty request, and with a disadvantage like that it would become quickly disfavored.

As I said, not outrageously bad, but that spiked counter-weight holds more disadvantages than it does advantages.

Also, the tungsten and wood thing is another point I don't really think entirely works out. You might want to see and consider my comments on that section.

 

[2021]

Ok. I think we should take this point by point.



Ok. There have been plenty of such weapons historically. This sounds fine. I should ask though. When you say 8 foot long, is that the shaft alone or does it count the head? Both designs exist historically, but which one you're going with would affect the rest of the evaluation. (I'll bring this up again when I get to the parts where it matters.)



Right. Let me stop you here. A scimitar curves WAY too much to take the directional stresses put on it by the extra torque of being handled as a pole-weapon. There are some scimitars out there that are curved at a level that's a little closer to a naginata, but if that's your justification then you might as well just call it a naginata.



Now THIS one is tough. In fact, it's probably the largest point of difficulty on here.

1st off, Tungsten is actually HORRIBLE for use in weapon making specifically BECAUSE of how hard it is. Hard = will keep an edge better, but it's more brittle. In other words, tungsten will chip and break very easily due to it's lack of bendability.

The tough part here is the idea of it having a wooden core. A core made out of a softer material that has quite a bit of bend and give to it actually is a common technique used to counter-act the downsides of a brittle hard material. I'm really not sure wood is going to cut it though. It might be going a little too far in the other direction.

Yes, live green wood does bend. However, dead wood becomes brittle as well and breaks way too easily. And, as covered, the tungsten would also be brittle.

I would say this could work if you make the core of the blade out of steel or wrought-iron. (Iron with a carbon content lower than steel. It is soft, but also very bendy. Iron with a carbon content higher than steel is called cast iron, and it's hard and brittle. Steel is actually the term we give to iron that has it's carbon in that goldilocks zone where it's neither too hard or too soft.)



Ok. If it needs the counter-weight, I'm going to presume you really meant it when you said the blade was thick.

In terms of weapon performance, I would say it can still function effectively in combat. However, this does bring up one potential problem. How strong is the person wielding this weapon?

If you're talking a spear with a counter-weight, then that means it's definitely quite heavy. This will cause it to tire out the muscles of the person wielding it, making it unsuitable for long periods of combat. So, it won't really be usable for your common infantry or cavalry man.

However, if you're talking the spear-toting equivalent of the English longbowman (the hardest part about training archers is getting their arm and back strength up), then it's perfectly fine. Skeletons have been found in Europe and other areas where lances were used where their right arm was noticeably larger than the left, even with the skeletal remains. These career lancers would have likely been able to carry this weapon you're describing no problem.



Alright. Here's where we have our potential problems cropping up.

Exactly what kind of ground combat are we envisioning here? The weapon you described would function perfectly well on horseback, but I can see some problems in ground combat.

Because you described the counter-weight as being spiked before, I am guessing you meant for it to be used in a one-on-many combat situation? Well, I don't think you need me to tell you this really isn't how combat went historically. But, having two threatening edges to it like this probably could be useful in warding off a large number of enemies if you get knocked off your horse during a cavalry charge and need to ward people away for a moment so you can make a break for it and get back behind allied lines.

On the other end though, I'd be concerned about the spiked end harming the horse if you're using it primarily on horseback.

Also, this is the point where the 8 foot shaft Vs. 8 foot total length question comes into play. 8 foot is an alright length for a naginata in terms of total length, and would be considered perfectly balanced. However, if you're talking 8 foot shaft with a blade on top of that, then you are talking a weapon too long to be used in single ground combat.

Pole weapons of that length would commonly be used from the back ranks of pike charges, essentially pikemen with even longer pikes than the front rank would bring their pikes down between allied units in order to add more pointy sticks to the charge. It would be a weapon standardly used in group combat.



I don't hear anything outrageously bad about this thing, but the spiked counter-weight doesn't really strike me as something that would come of use in all that many realistic situations. Also, as mentioned, there's the very real risk of it injuring the horse. I do not see a weapon with that design as ever existing outside of a none-off novelty request, and with a disadvantage like that it would become quickly disfavored.

As I said, not outrageously bad, but that spiked counter-weight holds more disadvantages than it does advantages.

Also, the tungsten and wood thing is another point I don't really think entirely works out. You might want to see and consider my comments on that section.

This is why, it should just be made into a club, just use good old sexy steel

 

[Representing_Tromba]

Ok. I think we should take this point by point.



Ok. There have been plenty of such weapons historically. This sounds fine. I should ask though. When you say 8 foot long, is that the shaft alone or does it count the head? Both designs exist historically, but which one you're going with would affect the rest of the evaluation. (I'll bring this up again when I get to the parts where it matters.)



Right. Let me stop you here. A scimitar curves WAY too much to take the directional stresses put on it by the extra torque of being handled as a pole-weapon. There are some scimitars out there that are curved at a level that's a little closer to a naginata, but if that's your justification then you might as well just call it a naginata.



Now THIS one is tough. In fact, it's probably the largest point of difficulty on here.

1st off, Tungsten is actually HORRIBLE for use in weapon making specifically BECAUSE of how hard it is. Hard = will keep an edge better, but it's more brittle. In other words, tungsten will chip and break very easily due to it's lack of bendability.

The tough part here is the idea of it having a wooden core. A core made out of a softer material that has quite a bit of bend and give to it actually is a common technique used to counter-act the downsides of a brittle hard material. I'm really not sure wood is going to cut it though. It might be going a little too far in the other direction.

Yes, live green wood does bend. However, dead wood becomes brittle as well and breaks way too easily. And, as covered, the tungsten would also be brittle.

I would say this could work if you make the core of the blade out of steel or wrought-iron. (Iron with a carbon content lower than steel. It is soft, but also very bendy. Iron with a carbon content higher than steel is called cast iron, and it's hard and brittle. Steel is actually the term we give to iron that has it's carbon in that goldilocks zone where it's neither too hard or too soft.)



Ok. If it needs the counter-weight, I'm going to presume you really meant it when you said the blade was thick.

In terms of weapon performance, I would say it can still function effectively in combat. However, this does bring up one potential problem. How strong is the person wielding this weapon?

If you're talking a spear with a counter-weight, then that means it's definitely quite heavy. This will cause it to tire out the muscles of the person wielding it, making it unsuitable for long periods of combat. So, it won't really be usable for your common infantry or cavalry man.

However, if you're talking the spear-toting equivalent of the English longbowman (the hardest part about training archers is getting their arm and back strength up), then it's perfectly fine. Skeletons have been found in Europe and other areas where lances were used where their right arm was noticeably larger than the left, even with the skeletal remains. These career lancers would have likely been able to carry this weapon you're describing no problem.



Alright. Here's where we have our potential problems cropping up.

Exactly what kind of ground combat are we envisioning here? The weapon you described would function perfectly well on horseback, but I can see some problems in ground combat.

Because you described the counter-weight as being spiked before, I am guessing you meant for it to be used in a one-on-many combat situation? Well, I don't think you need me to tell you this really isn't how combat went historically. But, having two threatening edges to it like this probably could be useful in warding off a large number of enemies if you get knocked off your horse during a cavalry charge and need to ward people away for a moment so you can make a break for it and get back behind allied lines.

On the other end though, I'd be concerned about the spiked end harming the horse if you're using it primarily on horseback.

Also, this is the point where the 8 foot shaft Vs. 8 foot total length question comes into play. 8 foot is an alright length for a naginata in terms of total length, and would be considered perfectly balanced. However, if you're talking 8 foot shaft with a blade on top of that, then you are talking a weapon too long to be used in single ground combat.

Pole weapons of that length would commonly be used from the back ranks of pike charges, essentially pikemen with even longer pikes than the front rank would bring their pikes down between allied units in order to add more pointy sticks to the charge. It would be a weapon standardly used in group combat.



I don't hear anything outrageously bad about this thing, but the spiked counter-weight doesn't really strike me as something that would come of use in all that many realistic situations. Also, as mentioned, there's the very real risk of it injuring the horse. I do not see a weapon with that design as ever existing outside of a none-off novelty request, and with a disadvantage like that it would become quickly disfavored.

As I said, not outrageously bad, but that spiked counter-weight holds more disadvantages than it does advantages.

Also, the tungsten and wood thing is another point I don't really think entirely works out. You might want to see and consider my comments on that section.

There are a lot of good points here. Some of them have been brought up by others so I've been working on them. The spiked counterweight is the biggest one so I've ditched that idea. As for ground combat, it would be something similar to open-field combat. As you said, it would be for warding off enemies until you you could either retreat or get reinforcements. due to there being no large counterweight I decided to change it to steel and shaped more like a thick falx or a naginata with a sharp bone spearhead on the back end. Another issue is its size. I decided to change it to a 6-foot long shaft with the blade being around 1.5 feet long and the spearhead being around 6 inches.

 

[Kenjona]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naginata

 

[Representing_Tromba]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naginata

Thank you for the wiki article. Though I don't want this weapon to be an outright Naginata.