Search the Community

****WARNING!! YOU'VE FOUND THE GREAT TEXT WALL OF PORTUGAL! TURN AWAY NOW IF YOU DISLIKE READING!**** So I've been checking out some topics about weapon weight and a lot of people seem to want it back (me included. Build system plz.) but a lot of others seem to not want it. I understand their concern especially on the Constitution system of the GBA era, but I think that the problem isn't so much the system's design, but the amount of realism GBAFE has. See, it has enough realism to tell you that women are weaker and smaller than men, which, for the large majority of the world, is true. But it doesn't have enough realism to tell you that there's a shit-load of different types of axes, a shit-load of types of spears, a shit-load of bows and a mega-fuck-ton of types of swords. I mean there's a LOT of swords. I was giving this some thought as I was working on adding these "sub-types" to a GBA game as a bit of a "rebalance hack" and was going to base it on the classes in question. Think about it. Let's use infantry sword classes in GBAFE as an example. Thieves are the lightest and weakest ones. Least suitable for combat. They appear to use daggers in combat. Myrmidons and Lyn appear to be the average build for an actual human being. They strike a neat balance of speed and strength. Not too much strength and a lot of speed, but a nice strength cap as Swordmasters nonetheless. They appear to use saber-like swords in battle. (though the Myrmidons have straight and apparently double-edged swords) Eliwood/Roy/Eirika appear to be average sized as well but they focus more of finesse than raw strength and cutting motions. They use Rapiers, and it's a fact that you need less force to stab something that to cut through it. Finally, the heaviest kind of infantry sword class is the Mercenary. They have balanced stats all around but you'll notice that when it comes to swordsmen, they are the strongest of the bunch. Gerik and Deke sit at a really good 13 con which makes them HUGE when you take 8 Con as the average person (judging by artwork) Raven and Ogier seem a little small in comparison and Harken does too to some extent at 11 con promoted but he's still larger than average. Echidna only has 9 con promoted but she's a woman so she's still larger than average. They are also the hardest hitting ones (barring crits) with strength bases, caps and growths larger than the others. They appear to use Greatswords/Longswords (art style makes it seem like a weapon as large as yourself isn't even all that) and promoted heroes kinda just use the same sword but in one hand. Keeping this in mind, what if the different classes straight up just used different types of swords (Daggers, Sabers, Rapiers, Greatswords, etc...) and each were catered to each class's needs and strengths. The spoilers contain my older ideas. This is my rather small-scale research based on youtube channels like Skallagrim, Scholagladiatoria, Metatron, Lindybeige and others, as well as my own search through HEMA websites such as wiktenauer and some thorough googling. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE CORRECT ME ON ANYTHING THAT YOU SEE WRONG. Also, please provide sources if you'd please. **Greatswords** Pros: -Ridiculous power due to the mass in the blade. -Versatile. They are faster than they would seem, are good at both thrusting and cutting and are good primary weapons, unlike virtually any sword that is shorter than it. -Half-swording makes them surprisingly good short-range weapons. As if they were a shorter spear. -Massive crossguard and the second set of quillons makes them REALLY good at parrying. -The Japanese Nodachi in particular was used to counter horsemen by sweeping at the horse's legs AFAIK, so it seems appropriate that the other Greatswords would be good for it as well (unless they are thrusting oriented swords). -The range, agility, power and good defense of the Greatsword makes them the best sword for countering spears. The way they were (suposedly) used against pikes suggests that they might be well used to counter spears. Not as good as other Polearms, but then, Greatswords are sort-of sword-shaped polearms anyway. -Range. HOLY SHIT RANGE. -Much like two-handed Cutting Polearms (like the Dane Axe), they can defend narrow passages by simply blocking an entrance. -Can use longsword techniques which makes them good dueling weapons (as the longswords were). -They look badass. -Pretty good 1 on 1 weapons. -The Mordhau (In english: "Murder Stroke") makes them decent at combating armored opponents. (In essence, you grab the BLADE of the sword with both hands and slam the crossguard/pommel onto your opponent, effectively turning the sword into an improvised warhammer. Not as good as an actual warhammer, but decent enough. Perfectly safe as well if you know what you're doing. Not exclusive to greatswords (longswords dit it as well and you COULD do it with the others, but Greatswords/Longswords/Arming swords did it better in general.) -As long as all opponents are in front of you, the greatsword is great at holding multiple foes at bay, since no one wants to get in its range, and they kind of HAVE to in order to attack the swordsman. (unless they have polearms, bows, or greatswords themselves) Cons: -While lighter than thought by the general public, still pretty hefty for a sword, and as such is pretty hard to stop a swing. As such, followthrough cuts should be mostly used instead. -Actually require a lot of training. More than longswords I would argue. Maybe I'm wrong though. Still, a lot of training. -Not exactly the easiest things to carry around. Then again, most primary weapons weren't easy to carry and would have to be discarded (even if temporarily) if a secondary weapon became more appropriate. -Require a LOT of room, and as such can't be used in tight formation too effectively or in tight spaces (corridors, etc). -Expensive to make. A lot of steel in there. -Still not as good at hacking as a pollaxe or dane axe, not as good at thrusting as a spear and not as good at blunt force trauma with the mordhau as a warhammer or even as an axe. -Exclusively two-handed so no shields allowed. -While half-swording makes it better than most polearms at close-quarter fighting, it's still worse than a one-hander if the foe is within arm's reach. **Thursters**(Rapiers, Estocs, Smallswords, etc...) Pros: -While just as heavy as any other one hander, the point of balance is REALLY far down the blade.(like almost on top of the crossguard) -Relies more on stamina(slow twitch muscles) than strength(fast twitch muscles). -Thrusting takes a lot less effort to pierce soft armors like gambeson than cutting does, which means, again, less strength required. -While it's unusual to see rapiers paired with shields due to the dueling nature of the weapon, it's a one-handed weapon so it CAN be paired with a shield if need be. (Excluding the Estoc, which I'd group with the rapiers for the purposes of this hack.) -Thrusts are harder to block with a weapon than cuts and in my (inexperienced and probably somewhat uninformed) opinion, just as hard to block with shields as cuts are. -The hand is VERY well protected. -Blade as long as a longsword's, weight of a one-hander, magnificent point of balance, profiecient in the hardest maneuver to block and amazing hand protection means it's basically the perfect melee weapon for an (unarmored) duel. (When not against a spear. Those are OP as shit.) -Stupidly easy to wear. Like most swords were. -The blade being so light makes it easy to redirect for feints. -The Estoc actually was an anti-armor weapon. It was basically a really long spike with a longsword hilt/crossguard. Cons: -Just as likely to lose to spears as any other sword shorter that a greatsword. -Reliance on the thrust rather than being a "cut-and-thrust" weapon (though it can still slice. It just can't hack) makes it predictable at times. -Built around dueling and self-defense, which means it's not well suited for war or skirmishes, in which people are likely to be wearing at the very least gambeson (which for the rapier might not be THAT bad) and varying levels of hard armors. (which basically counters it as well as most swords). (Again, exclude the Estoc.) -Built for taking on one opponent at a time (DUEL) so fighting multiple people with it is hard. (Though, fighting multiple people is hard in general) -Light blade makes it hard to block/parry/deflect heavier weapons or particularly strong swings with unless done basically flawlessly and with the "strong" (lower half) of the blade rather than with the "weak". (upper half) -Despite what Fire Emblem tells you, actually REALLY WEAK against both armored units AND cavalry. (Dat Estoc Tho.) -The Estoc in particular, was a sort of "two-handed rapier" which, while useful if covered in steel, is two-handed and therefore does not allow a shield. -The Estoc also has the weakness of not having an actual edge. Again, it was a really long and slender spike with a longsword-like handle and cross-guard. -The rapier is really light so you can "beat" the blade to the side pretty hard (unless you miss,lol), which lets you move in without getting skewered. **Backswords and Sabres** (I previously referred to this category as just sabres) I'm considering backswords to be any single edged, one handed, cutting-oriented straight sword. (Falchions; the ACTUAL Claymores, which were one handed basket-hilt swords; some viking swords; some Dao; etc...) Also, I'm considering Sabres to be any CURVED single-edged sword. (Messers, Cavalry Sabres, Katana, some Cutlasses, some Dao, etc...) Pros: -The Sabres slice like a motherfucker. (slice, not cleave.) -The Backswords cleave like a motherfucker. (but don't slice as well as a sabre.) -Since the Backswords cleave well, they also apply really good blunt force trauma to things they can't cleave through, like some Gambesons and basically any mail. Kinda just skid-off plate, though, as do most if not all swords. -The sabres are better for cramped spaces such as alleys since the sword's curve makes it take up a smaller "length" of space. I think I might need a drawing to illustrate this. -The Sabres can work around stuff like shields using thrusting techniques, due to the curve. (Short note: according to my research sabres should have a little less might but higher hit rate and vice versa for the backswords.) Cons: -BAD against armor, as it counters basically any cutting sword. -More often than not, a heck of a lot shorter than thrusting swords like the Rapier. -The Sabres HAVE to use the finnicky thrusting techniques on enemies that don't have a shield as well because the curve means that you have to curve your stabbing as well. **Daggers** (They are not good for combat. Only used historically as finishers, after another weapon did the brunt of the fighting. Thieves are still gonna be a utility class rather than combat.) Pros: -There's a shit-load of types of daggers. Thursters like the Rondell Dagger and Slicers like the Baselard, and even throwing knives. This means variety. Cons: -Yes most of the kills against armored units came from daggers but that's because there was another big armored dude subduing the first one to the point where he could pull up his visor and jam a dagger in his gullet, or they were wrestling. -Yes Rondells are the best Daggers to use on armor, but again, the victim would basically already have to be subdued or you'd have to be wrestling. -Yes throwing knives hurt... but they can't pierce even soft armors like Gambesons, aren't always guaranteed to hit with the blade unless you are a god at throwing from all ranges, and, finally, even if you do hit your opponent in an unprotected area, IT WON'T GO DEEP ENOUGH. It won't cause a severe enough injury to even immobilize a limb let alone actually kill someone. It CAN kill someone, if you are incredibly lucky, but it can't kill someone reliably. -Range. I mean really, don't bring a knife to a swordfight. Or rather, do, but have it around JUST IN CASE. **Broadswords"" Pros: -Average at everything. There doesn't appear to be any real weakness to them. Better range than shortswords an daggers, effective strikes, alices AND thrusts, allow for a shield... Cons: -Average at everything. There doesn't seem to be any specific advantages to them. -They can cut, but, unlike Backswords and Sabres, generally isn't gonna lop off limbs. (unless you REALLY power your cuts and/or your edge alignment is godly.) -They can thrust well enough, but don't have as much range or point control, both of which give AMAZING advantages to thrusts, as the "rapierish" weapons do.