forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Glorelendil wrote:

Otaku-sempai wrote: 1) The length of a long sword in TOR (basically a bastard sword) would make it unwieldy for a Dwarf to use it with one hand. However, there is no realistic reason why a Dwarf couldn't use it strictly as a two-handed weapon other than it is simply not in the RAW.

Could you explain? What about dwarf physiology would make it unwieldy? Just that the tip is more likely to hit the ground? But that would be true for two hands as well, wouldn't it? Because I actually think with their shorter limbs they would have greater leverage than a taller human with equivalent strength and mass.

My reasoning is based on the idea that the Long Sword in TOR is, from its description, basically the same as a bastard sword (as in Aragorn's 'Ranger' sword in the LotR films). Because of its length, a Dwarf trying to use it one-handed would be like a Man trying to do the same with a two-handed warsword. It isn't practical because the weapon is nearly as long as the wielder is tall. It may look cool as hell in a video game or anime, but would not be suitable for TOR.

I think we are just visualizing dwarves differently. I picture them as strong or stronger than men, and broader across the shoulders, but short.

You can't really apply the same expectations of what's reasonable for a given height. If you were to scale one up to Man-sized he would be about 300 pounds of muscle and, yeah, could handle a Greataxe or sword in one hand. It might look goofy, but laughing would be un-wise.

Glorelendil wrote:I think we are just visualizing dwarves differently. I picture them as strong or stronger than men, and broader across the shoulders, but short.

That's certainly how I envision them.

Glorelendil wrote:You can't really apply the same expectations of what's reasonable for a given height. If you were to scale one up to Man-sized he would be about 300 pounds of muscle and, yeah, could handle a Greataxe or sword in one hand. It might look goofy, but laughing would be un-wise.

See, here's the thing: No, he couldn't. Not meaningfully.

The weight distribution and balance are all wrong to wield something that long in one hand. He could carry it in one hand (since the weight isn't a huge deal)...but wield it effectively? Not a chance. It's not designed or weighted properly.

Ok, maybe a weapon intended to be only used 2 handed is going to be tough, no matter how strong you are. I will cede that point. Not worth arguing, anyway.

But I still contend that a Dwarf is at no disadvantage using a longsword one-handed. Maybe even at an advantage, because of the shorter levers he calls arms.

Glorelendil wrote:I think we are just visualizing dwarves differently. I picture them as strong or stronger than men, and broader across the shoulders, but short.

You can't really apply the same expectations of what's reasonable for a given height. If you were to scale one up to Man-sized he would be about 300 pounds of muscle and, yeah, could handle a Greataxe or sword in one hand. It might look goofy, but laughing would be un-wise.

Our visualizations of dwarves are about the same; we just differ on our views of the details. For my Man/Elf example, I think of Michael Moorcock's Elric of Melnibone wielding Stormbringer, a cursed blade about as long as he is tall. Of course, Stormbringer is also a magical blade and lends Elric vitality from the souls that it has devoured.

So your issue is aesthetic? It just seems weird to you to have a sword almost as long as you are tall and wield it in one hand?

*How tall are Dwarves, anyway? I just did some Googling on Longswords, Bastard Swords, and Hand-and-a-half Swords, and the biggest value I found was 51", with length more generally being less than 48". I picture Dwarves being 4 1/1 to 5 feet+ tall.