Hi there, just a little quickie here.

Are there any strenght requirements to use the doppelahander sword?
Or maybe I should ask what strenght is required to use it properly?

I imagine a person with less than average to average (>4) would have problems wielding such a major piece of steel?

st 4 sounds ok, but really as many things in roleplaying games, there are no rules about it, so please make one your self.

I my self think that a large troll will get 2 extra weapon ranges becouse his arm i twice as long and the club he is using is twice as long as a normal human sized club!

There are no rules about it, but i use my own, anyway st4 sound ok by me for a doppelhander, maybe even 5 should be had. and greatswords 4.
As you say yourself, maybe a lesser person can lift it, but can he wield use it for combat?

Yeah, I wouldn't restrict its use from weaker humans so much as give it an activation cost for anything but thrusting.

Yeah, that's something like I thought meself.

Extra cost for swings if ST less than 5 sounds reasonable.

Okay. Thankee!

I think that if there is going to be an activation cost, I would set minimum ST at 4. So activation costs would be for 3 and less in my book... Maybe have the activation cost be the difference between 4 and the Character's ST?

Why not just hit the whole CP once and be done with it. Say CP -3 or -4 if the character isn't Str 4/5? The reasons are twofold: first its easier than adding a point cost to every swing, second trying to hold on to a weapon that large if you weren't strong enough to control it properly would effect every action taken, not just atacks.

A Doppelhander weighs a grand total of six pounds. The only thing that is going to limit it's use is it's sheer length... but seeing as it's more often used like a pole-arm than a sword, that's not really a concern.

No minimum strength needed, no penalties for being weak. Maybe for being exceptionally short and trying to swing it like a normal sword...




No, strength really only comes into play with bows and their draw strengths.

A typical sledgehammer wieghs about 5 pounds. When swung, the strength of the wielder will determine how quickly it can be recovered to swing again.

How is a six-pound doppelhander different?

It's not.

Stronger people use bigger/longer swords/clubs/etc. better/faster, period.

And TROS rules don't really reflect this, but it's never been an issue for us, we simply choose weapons that suit our strength.

Bob Richter wrote: A typical sledgehammer wieghs about 5 pounds. When swung, the strength of the wielder will determine how quickly it can be recovered to swing again.

How is a six-pound doppelhander different?

It's not.

Stronger people use bigger/longer swords/clubs/etc. better/faster, period.

And TROS rules don't really reflect this, but it's never been an issue for us, we simply choose weapons that suit our strength.

Swords are balanced, a sledgehammer is not. Actually Ron made an interesting point in one of his essays about TROS. I myself have been guilty of trying to tinker with the various sim based rules of the game but the game isn't really about that in play. "Realism", whether acurate or not, is not the issue present in actual play.

I would still think that strength does come into play even with light weapons.

My the heavier of my two Katana weighs in at maybe 3 pounds. This is nothing for me and I can easily use it with only 1 hand. In game terms I'd probably have an Str of 5 or 6.
When I give the same sword to my wife, who barley tops 100lbs soaking wet and probably has a str 3 at best, she has to wield it in two hands and moves like I do when I am using my overwieght stage combat Claymore.

Also I think a Doppelhander is pretty clumsy as weapons go, its not just a "big longsword" its more like a poleaxe. They weren't wielded with finesse from anything I've read.

I agree with Mayhem. The sword would probably be of the proper length and weight in accordance with the user. It may be 4.5 pounds, not 6. A weak user would already be penalized for the lower damage their strength would result in. The only think that is if the weapon is extremely shorter than other weapons of its kind, a length reduction change may be in order

IMO mimimum strength for weapons is largely an artificial RPG idea, designed to give combat advantages for those who put more points in strength.

Although I think strength should factor into the combat pool along with dex, as parrying a heavier blow is more difficult.

A typical sledgehammer wieghs about 5 pounds. When swung, the strength of the wielder will determine how quickly it can be recovered to swing again.

How is a six-pound doppelhander different?

It's not.

Stronger people use bigger/longer swords/clubs/etc. better/faster, period.

And TROS rules don't really reflect this, but it's never been an issue for us, we simply choose weapons that suit our strength.

Actually, the rules reflect how things really work just fine.



-----------
next post
-----------

I would still think that strength does come into play even with light weapons.

My the heavier of my two Katana weighs in at maybe 3 pounds. This is nothing for me and I can easily use it with only 1 hand. In game terms I'd probably have an Str of 5 or 6.
When I give the same sword to my wife, who barley tops 100lbs soaking wet and probably has a str 3 at best, she has to wield it in two hands and moves like I do when I am using my overwieght stage combat Claymore.

Two questions there...

How tall is your wife, and how tall are you?

Does she have any training in swordplay?

Both of these things make a big difference in how easy a sword is to handle, much more than how strong you are.

Also I think a Doppelhander is pretty clumsy as weapons go, its not just a "big longsword" its more like a poleaxe. They weren't wielded with finesse from anything I've read.

Doppelhanders were somewhat clumsy weapons when held and swung like a normal sword. But when used from the half-sword position they were very graceful. They just handle more like short pole-arms in that position than swords.


-----------
next post
-----------

Although I think strength should factor into the combat pool along with dex, as parrying a heavier blow is more difficult.

Not if you're doing it right.

Strength factors into damage, but it's not going to affect your CP in any way.

I'm 6' 3" with a lot of mass. I can actually weild the aforementioned Claymore with one hand, though recoveries are difficult. I probably wouldn't have trouble doing a 1 hand maneuver with a 6 pound sword of equal length. She is 5' 8" but is built like an Elf (really, people at our wedding thought she was some kind of Fey creature). She has exactly the same issues with the Katana as I have with the claymore. There is not that much of a difference in our height, even less difference with our arm lendth. So where is her problem coming from if the only real differnce is that I weight more than twice what she does and much stronger?

As for training I have some with swordplay (Kendo/Kenjutsu and Shim Gum Do) and a lot more with unarmed martial arts (Shaolin Kenpo Karate and Bando). She has none beside what she's learned sparring with me (we used to do that a lot for fun) but has incredible coordination, balance, and agility. She is a tough match if I don't use my reach and footwork advantage to keep her on the defensive.

From what I see strength is a factor in maneuvering a weapon for the same reason it is a factor in damage: more strength = more potential force applied to the weapon. Newton First Law supports this: if an opject is in motion it will remain in motion until acted upon by an external force. If the wielder of a weapon cannot exert enough force with their muscles to overcome that weapon's velocity while it is in motion they will have a harder time controling the path of that weapon. This would include both recover and aiming an attack. I agree its not as large a factor as many RPGs make it (*cough*D&D adding Str modifier to hit*cough*) but it does factor in, particularly when weilding a larger weapon or when you are of lower strength.

If I'm wrong I'd really like to know why. Both my wife and I are getting more and more interested in swordsmanship again and are thinking of joining the ARMA together. So an explanation of where my misunderstanding lies would be appreciated.

Unfortunately without seeing you two in action and seeing the weapons you're using I really can't say much else. But I've seen a woman who is barely over 5 foot tall use a greatsword with a fair amount of skill and the only thing that's ever given her any trouble with it is its length compared with her height.

She can kick me ass, that much is for sure, and I have 9 inches on her and can pick the girl up with one arm.

Quite honestly, once your sword is moving, how well you move it isn't all that effected by strength unless you're weilding it in single chops that require you to recover after each blow. You really shouldn't be doing that... :) Every swing should flow to another or end in a guard postion.

Once you swing it's actually fairly easy to control and guide the tip because you have the heavier end in your hands, once again, it's a matter of the swords balance, not it's weight. Your bottom hand should be doing the guiding from the opposite side of the lever, with your front hand acting as the fulcrum, so it takes very little energy of motion to do fine control stuff.


That make any sense?

Just had a thought.

If you're really having trouble with the idea that a little, fairly weak person, can use a given weapon as well as your big hulking barbarian, modify the weapon's TN's.


If you're exceptionally big and strong, use the longsword TNs for a greatsword, or the arming sword TNs for a longsword.

Or if you're exceptionall small, use the greatsword TNs for the longsword and longsword TNs for an arming sword.

That work for everyone?

Mayhem1979 wrote: Every swing should flow to another or end in a guard postion.

That actually makes sense given that you were trained in kendo which is based around the Katana.

The katana is a slashing weapon, a 3 foot razor blade, draw cuts are going to be a big part of the style, but at the same time, if you manage to connect to make that draw-cut, how fast your recover isn't going to make much difference.

Recovery after the cut is less important. We were taught that in a real fight by the time you reach that stage either your opponent is dead, or you are. That first cut has to count.

One of the things i think is importent is that the user of a large weapon do got some weight, so when you swing your weapon, you dont "follow it", but control it.

One of my friends is very thin, but still strong, when he uses my claymore, he is actually slower then me, becouse i simply got the weight to let me control the swing, and not let the weight of the sword decide when the swing is over.

i have trouble my my english to bear over with me.

Is your friend stepping with the swing? If he is, he shouldn't be having any problems wit the sword trowing him around unless it's REALLY overweight.

I think he is not, generaly i think its also importent to have some experince when handling such weapons.

Advice for using a sword (two handed)

1 - Keep your shoulders square with your opponent

2 - rear foot shold be angled out, the forward foot should be pointed towards your opponent. Shoulder width apart, weight even distributed.

3 - Top hand should be at the top of the grip, the bottom should be grasping the pommel or just above it

4 - take a step as close to every time you swing as possible,

5 - make sure the sword always stops above your rear leg

6 - guide the sword with your lower hand using the upper hand as a pivot.

7 - DO NOT BLOCK EDGE ON EDGE


Have your friend try this, and practice it a bit and see how he improves.


ps - There are a number of types of steps, but the two most important for a beginner are...

1 - Passing step - Go to the foot postion described above. Take a step just like your walking, back foot passes the front and they switch postions.

2 - Simple step - Step forward with your forward foot, bring the rear foot up so your in the same stance as you started.

double post

Question on #2: Every unarmed martial art I've taken has said this is the wrong way to position one's feet because it inhibits quick lateral motion. Instead I've always been taught to have my rear foot at roughly 45 degrees off center.
Both sword styles taught a 90 degree angle between the front and rear feet.

So why the difference when using a sword?

Tash wrote: Question on #2: Every unarmed martial art I've taken has said this is the wrong way to position one's feet because it inhibits quick lateral motion. Instead I've always been taught to have my rear foot at roughly 45 degrees off center.
Both sword styles taught a 90 degree angle between the front and rear feet.

So why the difference when using a sword?

Your footwork would depend on what type of weapon you are wielding. For Italian rapier (i.e. linear, as opposed to the Spanish stuff on the circle), you'd definitely want your rear foot at 90 degrees. OTOH, for the Bolognese stuff, including the sidesword and spadone (i.e. the Doppelhander), the rear foot is closer to 45 degrees, as many of the moves are non-linear and involve oblique passing steps.

tauman

Mayhem1979 wrote:
And as to why the sword styles you learned dictate a 90 degree difference between the angles of your feet, I have no idea. I just went up and tried it and I noted that my mobilty was notably hampered to the side of my forward foot, and it made it uncomfortable to have my torso facing my target like I was taught to do.

What little training I have is in the western styles though, so my knowledge of the eastern ones is a bit fuzzy at best.

...this would be so much easier to do in RL... :)

The stance in any martial art is geared towards that which you have to deal with. In boxing or most unarmed arts, the attacks come in from the front and you attack forward. With European swordsmanship, the attacks may come from the front, but also the sides. Thus, you have to adjust your footing. Some period treatises show stances with almost 135°.

Your footwork would depend on what type of weapon you are wielding. For Italian rapier (i.e. linear, as opposed to the Spanish stuff on the circle), you'd definitely want your rear foot at 90 degrees. OTOH, for the Bolognese stuff, including the sidesword and spadone (i.e. the Doppelhander), the rear foot is closer to 45 degrees, as many of the moves are non-linear and involve oblique passing steps.

The stance in any martial art is geared towards that which you have to deal with. In boxing or most unarmed arts, the attacks come in from the front and you attack forward. With European swordsmanship, the attacks may come from the front, but also the sides. Thus, you have to adjust your footing. Some period treatises show stances with almost 135°.

Mayhem1979 Wrote:

No. How strong you are has little do do with anything other than how hard you can make that weapon hit. This is already reflected in the fact that your strength is one of the main fators in figuring out how much damage has been dealt.

Mayhem,
yes, for about two years now. I can, without any difficulty, read, interpret and understand the texts. We've extensively worked with the material. Trained it (and other treatises) with steel, wooden and padded weapons. Solo drill, with partners and full-force, full target sparring. Fun stuff.

Turin,
from what you are saying, why don't you try to incorporate STR into the CP? Right now it is calculated by (WIT+AG)/2, right? Make it (WIT+AG+STR)/3 or so. That way, you'd have your influence. It's never seemed to be much of a deal to me, though. Anyone who is a fighter will have sufficient strength to use the weapon, anyone who isn't will get finished off, anyway. That's life.

I study a combination of Lichtenauer, Talhoffer and Fiore for longsword, I.33 for sword and buckler (soon), Ott for grappling, Dolfechten Primer for dagger and Agrippa for rapier.

I also think Richard is correct. I am the stongest scholar in the class, but I am by no means the best swordsman, in fact my strength only gives me an advantage in the grapple. Swinging steel is a game of skill and speed, not strength. However, if you do need to add strength to the equation, Richard's suggestion is a pretty good one.

Mayhem1979 wrote: Alright before any other comment is made... a spadone and a doppelhander are completely different weapons. A spadone is another term for a bastard sword, which almost never exceeded longsword length.

I find that for the most part, the real advantage that my extra strength gives me over my wife when we spar is one of endurance--my arms don't tire as quickly when we are wielding heavier weapons (sidesword, rapier, 17th cent. english cavalry sword), but for sport-weight weapons (duelling sabre), it's no advantage at all.

For most human-on-human combat with similar weapons, proper technique should allow you to handle the force of any the blow. The problem comes when you have a mismatch and you're trying to parry a greatsword with a duelling sabre or smallsword (admittedly, not likely to happen). In TROS, this would translate to trying to parry a huge sword wielded by a large troll or the likes. Trying to use a human-size sword or shield to stop the blow of a 8-10 troll's "longsword" would be a real nightmare.

BTW, how do you like Agrippa? I've looked at his rapier text but find it to more oriented more towards a heavier sword than the "traditional" rapier, as his guards are too far out of line to allow you to attacks of lighter rapiers and riposte in stesso tempo. Yet I find it to be an intriguing manual that would really work when encountering the stouter and shorter early rapiers (or "transitional sideswords" of the mid-to-late 1500s).

Steve

Salamander wrote: I study a combination of Lichtenauer, Talhoffer and Fiore for longsword, I.33 for sword and buckler (soon), Ott for grappling, Dolfechten Primer for dagger and Agrippa for rapier.

I also think Richard is correct. I am the stongest scholar in the class, but I am by no means the best swordsman, in fact my strength only gives me an advantage in the grapple. Swinging steel is a game of skill and speed, not strength. However, if you do need to add strength to the equation, Richard's suggestion is a pretty good one.

tauman wrote: I find that for the most part, the real advantage that my extra strength gives me over my wife when we spar is one of endurance--my arms don't tire as quickly when we are wielding heavier weapons (sidesword, rapier, 17th cent. english cavalry sword), but for sport-weight weapons (duelling sabre), it's no advantage at all.

It might depend on whether or not you're wearing harness--I don't know (having never fought in harness, and being unfamiliar with how long it would take two skilled warriors wearing it to decide a contest of arms). While a one-on-one fight only lasts a few seconds, a battle can last far longer (you don't want to exhaust yourself on your first opponent).

Steve

[MKF]Kapten wrote:

tauman wrote: I find that for the most part, the real advantage that my extra strength gives me over my wife when we spar is one of endurance--my arms don't tire as quickly when we are wielding heavier weapons (sidesword, rapier, 17th cent. english cavalry sword), but for sport-weight weapons (duelling sabre), it's no advantage at all.

From what I have heard from the sword wielders on the forum, a fight will take a couple of seconds. It's not time enough to get tired, no matter how wild you are. So I guess in most TRoS- situations that really doesnt apply.

tauman wrote: BTW, how do you like Agrippa? I've looked at his rapier text but find it to more oriented more towards a heavier sword than the "traditional" rapier, as his guards are too far out of line to allow you to attacks of lighter rapiers and riposte in stesso tempo. Yet I find it to be an intriguing manual that would really work when encountering the stouter and shorter early rapiers (or "transitional sideswords" of the mid-to-late 1500s).

Steve

One thing to take into account for the advantages of strength in combat - Sparring is different than real combat. It helps prepare you, but many things that occur in real sparring are different than in a real fight (not that I've been able to test this idea with real weapons, but I'm comparing it to sparring in boxing, martial arts and tournament wrestling, compared with actual fights).

I've heard from some recreationists that a shield will hold up for a very long time if taken care of, and that they would almost never be damaged in combat. In that case, the romans would not have to worry about replacing shields when fighting dacian's with falx's, which was a problem recorded roman historians. I think a blow from someone not trying to kill their opponent with blunted weapons is far different from real combat.

There are also many moves to bring strength into play to give a combat advantage which are not allowed and to dangerous when sparring.

Ironic, I have the sword, and the dagger is on order (four months of payments and waiting, but it was worth it). Not to toot my own horn, but there are pictures of my instructor (and friend) and I showing the Bolognese sidesword guards here: http://www.salvatorfabris.com/BologneseGuards.html
and I'm using that sword. Anyway, it would be the perfect sword for Agrippa. After you work with Agrippa for awhile, check out Marozzo (a predecessor) and Fabris (a successor).

I haven't done much German stuff, but I know what you mean about similarities.

Steve

Salamander wrote:

tauman wrote: BTW, how do you like Agrippa? I've looked at his rapier text but find it to more oriented more towards a heavier sword than the "traditional" rapier, as his guards are too far out of line to allow you to [parry] attacks of lighter rapiers and riposte in stesso tempo. Yet I find it to be an intriguing manual that would really work when encountering the stouter and shorter early rapiers (or "transitional sideswords" of the mid-to-late 1500s).

Steve

I am still in the basic points of Agrippa, but man is some of this stuff interesting. We are currently learning the fine control of the point and setting aside as well as the lunge, the thrust from the lunge and double lunges... The instructor has mixed in some of the later stuff as well, from what I can tell... It is all similar, but different from what I have learned in the long sword. If you have used a long sword in the German Tradition, then you know what I mean.

So far I have liked it. Even the stuff that looked kind of crazy to me. I intend to do more cut & thrust fence on my own time as I plan on getting one of these... http://www.armor.com/2000/catalog/item111.html and one of these... http://www.armor.com/2000/catalog/item198.html in the New Year of '05.