biggest LIES about medieval weapons from video games and RPGs

In early AD&D, what was called the long sword was more of an arming sword, the broad sword was a variant that did an extra half point of damage (2d4 rather than 1d8) against human targets but less damage against large targets while not working as well against armoured targets. The bastard sword was more of a real-life long sword as it could be used either 1 or 2 handed. It did slightly more damage than a long sword, and two-handed it had better to-hit (penetration?) against armoured opponents.

Of course, Gary Gygax was a gamer and game designer rather than a military historian, operating in the pre-internet age. There would have been a limit as to how accurate his portrayal of the weapons was.

U should do a review on the voulge.

Oh my gosh!!
I love that first short-sword!!
😂 😅

Love your videos. Wish YouTube wasn't such a cunt

This made me think back when you had your wooden representations of weapons. I still loved those. How far this has come

Not sure they are lies, because it's FANTASY for a reason. You can't take FANTASY physics and compare it to real life physics. Just like how Fantasy characters can carry weapons far larger then themselves. Also MAGIC and ABILITIES are a big part of FANTASY, something we don't have in real life.

There should always more mass behind a spear thrust than a dagger. You should test that.

17:49 isn't this where the story of Henry I being shot with a crossbow randomly picked up by a cook comes from?

You missed warhammers, fist weapons, the quarterstaff, clubs, and unarmed fighting

Great video Shad! Thank you!

🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯🍯

To your point on weapon lethality being relatively comparable across the board, it can be assumed that Hit Points (in Fantasy Role Playing Games, at least) don’t only represent a physical ability to survive damage, but they represent the combat itself. Ie, a hit with a dagger which does damage is a stroke that the foe dodged or parried in just the nick of time, or it can be an actually deep wound, depending upon the opponent’s Current Hit Points. This layer of abstraction is missed quite often, however, so I understand if this was not your understanding.

The sling😢

Интересно было послушать

Интересно было послушать

In Chivalry 2, the shields are the only items with HP values to my knowledge. After taking a hit that would go beyond the HP value of the shield, it breaks. And some weapons like Pole Hammer, Dane axe etc do more damage to shields than things like swords.

Bec de Corbin!! Bec de Corbin!!!!

A two handed flail does havoc. Though the type I’m referring to isn’t a ball and chain. Really will f up your day if you think you shield is going save you.

A double headed axe is for cutting trees. One side of the axe blade usually would be very sharp for chopping. while the other side would be used more utilitarian. Use for cutting roots branches and things that could dull the blade or damage it. Today double headed axes are used in the same manor.

Not sure if I remember wrong but isn't flail mainly use against shield bearer? While the shield can stop the flail's stick part, the chained-ball can swing around and bypassing the shield and hitting the shield bearer. Other than that, yea not really as useful as the others and hard to use too.

on great swords being versitile in pathfinder 2e they do have th versitile trait

Surely a spear should do double damage compared to a dagger, because it's 2 handed.
It's like saying a one handed sword does the same damage as a 2 handed sword.
Obviously both can be lethal, but if your against armor, penetrative force is just greater with more leverage and power.

most of the early points are down to just how are you going to really quantify the stats of a weapon that is 6 inches longers better at thrusting but still good at cutting etc etc its so many naunces that it would at a point of comparing all of these these would actually take away enjoyment of the games instead of having a rough general idea of each category and letting it be. Daggers do comparable damage to a short sword, but a short sword does more damage, so in dnd a dagger doing 1d4 and a shortsword doing 1d6, can reflect that easy of getting a more "effective" blow because of that reach, similiar to a longsword doing a 1d8 being again, easier to get a more devasting blow with the range, etc. Its a workable solution to simplify the differences in a reasonable way. Adding in different modifers against different armor types, none-light-med-heavy, making it like, 1 foot differenced instead of 5, being able to do thrust or slash with different modifers against different things, etc etc is just so much that its not worth it for the amount of things you'd have to be constantly remembering, doing even more math in an already math heavy system etc. Get a general feel that matches the capabilities of the weapon and call it good.

point 2 on bows, yeah you can make a freak shortbow at 110 lbs, and a long bow at 100, but the standard use of both, is vastly different, with a standard shortbow, and recurve bow, being 30-60, and that's more than enough for hunting, while we have longbows averaging 80-110 lbs on their average with 200 being tested and used as the current draw weight record. Add in the longer shaft and fletching, and you do get an on average, more powerful, more accurate, and longer ranged weapon comparably, with a much higher impact weight and penetration because you can have a arrow tip of similar size to a shortbow arrow, with 4x the weight behind it, and 1.5x the speed (shortbows being 300-400 grains while medieval war bows are 1200 grains +, and shortbows roughly shoot 100+draw weight fps, so 130-160 fps, while longbows shoot 150-214 fps, in theory shads 110 draw weight shortbow can equal or exceed the speed of an average warbow but will still have much less kinetic energy, a less stable flight and a smaller size of wound, albeit with a longer max range but that range is unreliable comparably because of its smaller size and fletching.)

point 3 on spears, compared to most swords? they're unwieldy. you need so much more space to maneuver, your slashing ability is compromised, but spears in a group are disgustingly more effective than almost any other weapon because groups counter the weaknesses of a spear near perfectly, because in a group of 30 people, i don't need to maneuver my spear because i have 10+ dudes on either side of me covering that, and it's quite hard to bumrush your way to my close space through a shield and spear when you can't even attempt to flank me. but in a 1v1, where there isn't massive amounts of space to the sides, or above? You can choke point with the spear sure, but if i can use a shield to catch your tip, or deflect it and push forward rabidly you can't do anything to get it back in position besides pulling it back compared to a sword thats very easy even up to longsword sizes to spin flip etc and keep effectiveness. pure numbers wise, a longsword is as damaging as a spear in thrusting, and is much, MUCH, better at slashing, is easier to land blows on tighter margins because its easier to handle, especially one handed with a shield. The spear is the king of war because a spear gets exponentially more deadly in groups, were swords do not. A sword is a sidearm in a shielded formation whereas the spear and shield are equally as powerful in formation, but in small groups or singular, you're trading reach for maneuverability and easy of use beyond keeping someone further away from you, and in a normal indoor setting, such as a house or cave, you're usually gonna keep bumping into walls ceilings and doorways far more, and i'm not going to keep asking my dm for the size of every goddamn thing and if i get a negative modifier here or there every time i go into anywhere.

Your piston traveling downwards in your car, is also referred to as the power stroke. 😊