[Iromakuanhe] Hlaraian Clothblades

If no one has any objections, I intend to approve this Monday.

By concealed do you mean that it is disguised as part of a visible mundane accessory or item of clothing, or is it hidden under the user's outfits? The mention of a "Leather Sheath" only implies the latter.

He means the latter, Fian. It is fully possible to have an Iromakuanhe who wears an outfit entirely made out of clotheblades.

What is the damage rating for these blades? I understand that this can be different kinds of blades, but some sort of information on this would be appreciated

Nashoba said:

What is the damage rating for these blades? I understand that this can be different kinds of blades, but some sort of information on this would be appreciated

Click to expand...

Ahem, Nash: Melee attacks should be determined by the GMs. There's a lot of factor with force involved, so there's no consistent level of damage for melee attacks. Thus we'll not include melee on the DR scale, except for maybe special energy sabers, etc.

I don't see this as needing to have a listed DR.

Neither do I, what I want to know is how do the Clothblades compare to regular blades.

List of General Melee Weapons

Just like the modifications this page lists. Are these blades, better or worse than a conventional blade and in what way. That's what I'm referring to information so the GM can make that call. Eg if the Clothblade is better at penetration, then being used in a stabbing attack it would do more damage. That's what I want.

I would assume something called 'Clothblades', despite their ability to harden and become very sharp, would have one major disadvantage: they would be extremely light. Many larger weapons do most of their damage through their weight, and channeling the force of that weight moving onto a concentrated point, such as their edge. also, you would not be able to parry or block larger weapons with these due to their lack of mass.

Actually, a melee weapon is going to do most of its damaged from the force put behind it by the person using it, the second most from the speed it is moving at, the third from the area that the force is being distributed across. Weight dosen't really factor into it much.

Having the weapon be lightweight is extremely useful because it doesn't fatigue the user.

Having the weapon's weight concentrated along the path that the striking portion travels to hit the target helps guide the user along the right path and helps build up inertia.

The actual weight of the weapon itself is much less important. There is also no reason a lightweight blade wouldn't be able to block a heavier blade (weapons breaking and such not counted of course).

Remember: F= M V^2 so Velocity is way more important than mass.

Iso, the entire middle ages completely disagrees with your statement. A broadsword was way more powerful then a sabre in terms of force, simply because of it's mass. The variance in velocity of a human swing isn't enough to produce much of a difference at all, thus mass becomes greatly important with a melee weapon.

You are confusing Mass with Torque. Broadswords were heaver because they were larger, not because weighing more made a weapon more powerful.

Torque in this case being T = (Distance to center) X (Force)

Or basically, because when you swing a blade, the outermost part of the blade has to move faster than the closer parts of the blade because it has further to travel.

Because it is moving faster, it has a higher velocity (Force = Mass x Velocity^2 ).

V^2 is a lot of hurt applied to whatever gets hit.

And really, which do you think causes more damage? The less than 10 pounds of the broadsword or the 100-200 pounds of force that a human is capable of delivering?


Really the mass is one of the least important factors. (melee damage is also about as predictable as gun damage and should really be on the DR chart, but that is a discussion for another day).

Uso, you can smash someone out of the saddle of a horse with the flat of a broadsword, toward the middle of the blade. Try doing that with your pretty little rapier sometime. Yes, velocity has a major effect on force, but the variance in how fast you can swing something doesn't change that much between a 1 lb weapons and a 5 lb weapon. Mass plays a much bigger role then you would think in melee combat. Trust me, I fenced sabre and foil for 9 years, and want to guess which one hits harder?

As interesting as this 'weight vs. speed' argument is, I think we're forgetting something. We're assuming the clothblades are lighter than their metal counterparts. Although I can see why it would be assumed, this should not be the case. For all we know, each square inch of clothblade material weights 10 pounds and wearing a longsword version of the thing on one's person would be equal to carrying full-plate armor in weight (an obvious exaggeration, but just doing this to further point out what I mean).

That said, the article should contain something that determines how much weight is usually attributed to which size of clothblade. Otherwise it might be erroneously assumed that the blade weights a whole lot less than what was originally intended.

EDIT: Also, it would be worth mentioning how much of the material is needed to make each of the blade sizes. We don't know if you need a whole cloak only to make a dagger, or if you could make a longsword out of a sleeve, etc...

EDIT: Also, it would be worth mentioning how much of the material is needed to make each of the blade sizes. We don't know if you need a whole cloak only to make a dagger, or if you could make a longsword out of a sleeve, etc...

Click to expand...

I thougth it would be better to just let people be reasonable and use their heads. One does not make a Khanda out of a sock, or a Katar out of an entire trenchcoat.

-shrugs-

I'm just saying it might be worth mentioning how much of it can be used, or is usually used. I mean, for all I know, you could use an entire cloak just to make a longsword, so that it would be properly as dense and as heavy as it's metal counterpart, just as much as you could make a sleeve become a longsword to weight less, or apply less or more material to the user's preference, as desired. Obviously I don't think you could properly make a double-handed sword out of a sock, as you mentioned, but I think it would conflict for lighter weaponry which the users might wish to make heavier or lighter.

It would be nice to know whether or not this can be done to begin with, or if there's a required amount that needs to be used to make certain sizes.

Aendri said:

Uso, you can smash someone out of the saddle of a horse with the flat of a broadsword, toward the middle of the blade. Try doing that with your pretty little rapier sometime. Yes, velocity has a major effect on force, but the variance in how fast you can swing something doesn't change that much between a 1 lb weapons and a 5 lb weapon. Mass plays a much bigger role then you would think in melee combat. Trust me, I fenced sabre and foil for 9 years, and want to guess which one hits harder?

Click to expand...

A rapier is designed to flex to dissipate energy when hit on the side, that is why it dosen't 'hit as hard'. That goes double for the fencing versions that are designed not to hurt too badly.

again, the difference between 201 pounds of force and 205 pounds of force is negligible compared to the amount of force being put in by the body or by the velocity of the blade itself. Saying this will do less damage because it is lightweight isn't really a good line of questioning because that attribute really isn't going to affect anything.

The last thing I want is for this thread to be derailed. I'd like to ask, point blank.

Is there anything holding up approval, that I should directly address? There have been consistently conflicting messages about what I should be doing.

I'll go ahead and drop my argument, but I agree there should be at least general guidelines on how much cloth goes into the different sizes. Because while a sock is the same general size as a knife, it's nowhere near as dense, thus why one is a much more effective weapon then the other. So it should be assumed that you'll need a larger sized cloth then you would expect.

Exhack said:

The last thing I want is for this thread to be derailed. I'd like to ask, point blank.

Is there anything holding up approval, that I should directly address? There have been consistently conflicting messages about what I should be doing.

Click to expand...

Exhack is correct. There is nothing here holding up the approval of this submission, and there is nothing here wrong with it.


This review is for: Hlaraian Clothblades

The submitted article is/has…
[x] A general topic sentence under the title header
[x] Artwork (illustrations are required for Starships, Vehicles, Hand weapons or Small Arms, Uniforms for military forces or large corporations and new alien species not from the race of the day CCG)
[x] Needed and/or useful to the setting
[x] In the proper format/template
[x] Proofread for spelling and grammar
[x] Easy to read and understand (not a lengthy mass of technobabble)
[x] Wikified (terms that could be a link should be a link)
[x] No red and/or broken links
[x] Reasonably scientifically plausible
[x] Reasonably neutral point of view

The submitted article is/does not…
[ ] Overpowered (or cutting tech for a faction with little or no roleplay)
[ ] Obtusely redundant
[ ] Contain copy pasta descriptions of systems or interior compartments
[ ] Unauthorized by faction managers or player-controlled corporation
[ ] Contain references to IC events that have not occurred (SM must authorize retcons)
[ ] Use second-person language (“you” or “your”) unless it is an instructional guide aimed at players.
[ ] Use bombastic language (“virtually immune,” “nearly indestructible,” “insanely powerful,” “horrible effects”)
[ ] Use an unbalanced header/text ratio (many headers but sections are one-liners)
[ ] Use major unapproved sub-articles that should be submitted separately
[ ] Lacking Detail
[ ] Images hosted on sites other than stararmy.com (Photobucket, Imageshack, etc are not allowed)

The article has…
[NA] Speeds in compliance with the Starship Speed Standard, if applicable
[NA] Damage Capacity and Damage Ratings in compliance with the DR Guidelines
[x] The in-character year of creation/manufacture. (Should be current year. Future years not allowed).
[NA] The Standard Product Nomenclature System, if applicable.


Summary


Status: Recommended for Approval

Notes
I AM DISSAPOINTED BY THE FACT THAT YOU LET THIS THREAD GET DERAILED USELESSLY



I intend to finish this review by: Right here. Right now.

Uso,
My concerns were brought up, and the thread went way off to tangent. So I'm withdrawing my concern. Approve it.