Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[SirHoneyBadger]

bjlong: About the Phillipinos teaching stick and knife fighting, I'm sure you're right, but I see dwarfs learning to wrestle, first. Why? Because they've already got so much experience with tools, that it's unnecessary to teach them an additional way to use yet another "tool", until after they've learned that there's a difference between fighting, and hacking at a tree or hammering a horseshoe.

Furthermore, it would be a good way of getting into their heads that things are different, on the battlefield. I see taking all their tools away from them as being a bit like shaving the heads of new recruits in the Army.

And yes, you're right that fighting with weapons does carry over into unarmed combat, to a degree--just like your using tools carries over a bit into armed combat. It's still pretty limited, though (striking someone with a stick might teach some things about striking with a fist, but it can never convey what it actually feels like), and my own martial arts training has always been that you learn to use your body first, for both offense and defense, weapons after. So I'm admittedly a little bit prejudiced towards that philosophy.

[chucks]

A large number of weapon fighting techniques are modifications of unarmed fighting techniques.  The use of properly balanced weapons allows the fighter to use them as extensions of their limbs using techniques already learned sans weapons.  As for Eskrima, you are correct that they fight with the machetes and rattan sticks prior to learning the unarmed techniques.  I can only hope that once skill synergies come into play, having a high skill in unarmed/wrestling will carry over to minor improvements to the weapons skills.

This is just a huge fascination I have with the Romans, but I would love to see gladiuses added to the upstream raws.  I'm sure someone's added them to some mod somewhere, but it would be awesome to see them in Toady's distributed raws.

[bjlong]

I started with armed combat myself, and am now working on unarmed. It's much different than what carries over from just using tools, trust me. Striking someone with an implement is at once scary and exciting, when you're doing it for the first time.

chucks, we can turn your statement around to say that a large number of unarmed fighting techniques are modifications of weapon fighting techniques. However, your next statement is wrong--using weapons as "extensions of your arms" just doesn't hold true. There are a lot of new factors to learn, and learn to exploit. (Incidentally, the same is true when you're going the other way! Hooray, symmetry!)

I'd say that the general striking thing would encompass both philosophies, and that we'd just have to chalk the rest up to different playstyles/philosophies. And, unless I'm mistaken, dodging and other skills have been dissociated from any one weapon skill, so we'd just need to figure out how the general striking would work with weapon skills.

As for the psychological aspects, that really needs to be addressed in another thread, along with stuff like shell-shock, unit cohesion, and other psychological aspects of the military, and maybe groups in general.

[SirHoneyBadger]

I know I'd rather learn to fight with sticks *after* I learned to fight unarmed, because part of my unarmed training was learning how to properly block and defend from sticks, along with all the other toughening exercises I went through. Doing it the other way around sounds really ouchy, especially now that I'm old and don't heal quite as fast as I used to.

chucks: I'm with you about the Romans, they were cool, and I have a nagging suspicion that meetings with Romans may have influenced what the Norse meant by "dwarfs".

That's what I think of shortswords as, though, basically. A weapon with a blade somewhat less than 60 centimeters, that can be used for both thrusts and slashes. 

There were many different kinds of shortswords throughout history--the sax, the baselard, the cinquedea, etc. but the gladius (including both the longer spathae, and the semispathae) is the most famous, and one of the most effective weapons in all of history, in sheer numbers of enemies slain by it.

bjlong is right about weapons not being used as extensions of the arm. They were primarily tools, that happened to be used for killing. Infact, very few weapons were designed to follow the shape of the arm, surprisingly. The yataghan, the falcata, the kilij to a point-and ofcourse the kukri-are the only major weapons of this type that I'm aware of. There were a few axes as well, but I don't think they even had a separate designation.

[Pyrophoricity]

I'd just like to add that I agree with Sirhoneybadger about unarmed combat - the "bare knuckle" approach to fighting seems a logical way to intergrate dwarves into combat as opposed to turning up day 1 with an axe and starting from there.

As a student of Eskrima and Mauy Thai myself I would add that when I first started its was the physical side of unarmed combat that wore me out and tested me more than training with weapons, though conversely nothing teaches you to dodge and block like training with actual weapons.

Finally @ Orange Drink; Did you ask the guy why he was wielding a sharpened axe and swinging it with such force as to injure his arm with a swing? Seems madness to me the idea that during a "mock fight" anyone would attempt big strikes with an axe as sharp as that.

[LegoLord]

I also have some doubts of this medieval weapons enthusiast.  Quite obviously, if there is a move that will injure your arm and hack open your back, then that move involves using the weapon improperly.

[Footkerchief]

I'd just like to add that I agree with Sirhoneybadger about unarmed combat - the "bare knuckle" approach to fighting seems a logical way to intergrate dwarves into combat as opposed to turning up day 1 with an axe and starting from there.

This seems to be the approach Toady's taking.

06/02/2009: [...] Unskilled dwarves will be given some basic unarmed and partnerless weapon drills until they are judged ready to move up to sparring, though these drills should also continue even when sparring training is started.

[Byakugan01]

I also have doubts. Was he merely an enthusiast who collected the weapons, or was he actually trained in how to use them (and not self trained?). I have only handled axe-like implements for chopping wood-forget the name-but even though these are blunt, the weight alone can cause you to injure yourself if you don't use it properly (the tool bouncing off the wood is also possible). I suspect he didn't know what he was doing, since being a weapons enthuisast isn't the same as knowing how to use them. If they were that dangerous to use, he should have known that and participated with a single bladed axe, as common sense would dictate.

 Also, if the axe is two handed it would be pretty much impossible to hack your own back: Try positioning your hands as if you were gripping a pole, and swinging them. The most natural feel is swingning to either side. Raising them over your shoulder at a 90 degree angle produces some discomfort, and anyone with half a brain should know that lifting the axe over your head is a one-way ticket to getting killed-if not by yourself, then by your opponent. A one-handed axe would be much lighter, and the weight would not be as much of an issue. There is such a thing as putting TOO much force into the swing, however-otherwise known as overextending yourself. This *would* have the potential to break the bones in your arm with a sufficiently heavy weapon, and is what I suspect this enthusiast did. I doubt he actually knew how to use it a more than a novice level, though he may have been able to use a single bladed axe without problems.

BTW, where in the back did he hack himself? The location of the cut alone would say alot about how he was using the axe. If the cut was vertical, then he must have pulled the rather stupid stunt of raising it over his head or shoulder. Which reminds me: can't you augment the ability of the body to turn by turning INTO the axestroke-much as a fencer will extend to follow the strike and get extra distance? You really only need to use one leg to do that, from what I remeber from when I took fencing.

[Pyrophoricity]

Thinking about it, given the proximity of the spine and shoulder blades the guy was lucky not to cause some serious harm.

Though if I were to guess as to why he'd do it I would say that it was probably just an attempt to recreate a pose so often used of an axe weilding fighter with the axe drawn right behind the back, rather than a historicly accurate use of the weapon.

[chucks]

Internet Rule #14: Do not argue with a troll, it means they win.

Seriously, some idiot with real weapons hurt himself.  End of story.  Who cares beyond that?  I don't care when someone tells me about their inbred redneck cousin shooting himself in the foot beyond shaking my head and stifling a giggle.  Can the armchair physicians please sit down?

[Byakugan01]

So in summary, the double headed axe *is* a viable weapon. Out of curiosity though, wouldn't bearding an axe make it easier to disarm? Or make it easier to use for disarming? Either way, that beard could-in theory-get hooked on the opponent's weapon or shield, opening up the possibility of getting disarmed or disarming your opponent. Conversely, wouldn't serrated blades make stuck-ins much more likely?

[Silverionmox]

Internet Rule #14: Do not argue with a troll, it means they win.

Internet Rule #14bis: unless their goal is to stop the discussion

Personally, I just argue honestly and patiently until their head explodes. Next time, they run away.

[chucks]

Internet Rule #14: Do not argue with a troll, it means they win.

Internet Rule #14bis: unless their goal is to stop the discussion

Personally, I just argue honestly and patiently until their head explodes. Next time, they run away.

I wholeheartedly support that corollary.  Just be careful, no good deed goes unpunished.

[Neonivek]

Actually what you do if a Troll wants to stop a discussion is to IGNORE them!

Goodness...

the double headed axe *is* a viable weapon

Yes but a single headed Axe would be better since an Axe cannot maintain momentum for the second hit making the other end window dressing.

Weapons that have two ends often have a different kind of weapon on the other end.

[Mel_Vixen]

Orange drink: I learn Medieval fighting ("German fencing shool") by the talhofer, Master Lichtenauer, Meyer and Danziger. I doubt that these are Asian. Fact is a "Zorn Hau" ("Zorn" = Wrath, "Hau" = Strike) i counter with a sting to the belly. Why? Because the other guy has his damn weapon somewhere in his back. Apart from that a "Zorn Hau" has its uses in the right situation.

Oh and you have concepts of closed and open lines.

edit: to the Armys: Germany was in the midleages a patchwork of many little "baronys" "Kingdoms" "principalities" and so on. Thanks to this the most armys here were composed of mercenaries. These mercenaries, "Freifechter", traveling knights, in later periods "Landsknechte", were in fact highly trained.

A peasant by the way got a Pike mostly since swords and axes were weapons of the higher classes which was in some parts of the country ensured by a law. This lead to the development of the "großes messer" a singleedged sword since only doubleedged swords were forbidden.

If you have really learned to fight you just dont make such failures as swinging that wide back to hurt yourself because it has become something reflex-like.

Bijong: The english wikipedia has a translated version of the talhofer. Talhofer himself wasnt that much an artist (still its pretty good for the midleages) the texts on the other hand are much more helpful for that matter.

SHB: Got your pn. Forgot to write an Answer appearantly.