Dragaera

Greatsword vs Rapier (was Question for Steve)

Fri Aug 30 10:55:30 PDT 2002

On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 10:44:27AM -0700, "Penney, Sean" <seanp at ea.com> wrote:
> > > > Barbara Baj said:
> > > > >A greatsword versus a rapier would be thing to see, in my opinion,
> > though
> > > > it might be
> > > > >a very short fight. :)
> > > > My money's on the person with the rapier.
> >  Matthew Hunter:
> > > It's never that simple.
> Well, of course.  
> I wasn't after a review of hand-to-hand 101, but thanks anyway.  It's easy
> to speculate and imagine scenarios where one fighter or another may be the
> victor.  But let's look at the weapons themselves.  If the 30"+ smallsword
> replaced the 40"+ rapier because guys wielding smallswords were schooling
> the guys with rapiers, well, a weapon that entered the field in the middle
> ages against a weapon that incorporates all the refinements of the next
> couple hundred years would be like bringing a knife to a gun-fight.  The
> greatsword was an infantry weapon of the 15th and 16th centuries, not a
> duelling weapon.  

We were not discussing exclusively duels.  I agree that, in a
one-on-one duel, fought honorably, without armor, the rapier has a
significant advantage.  Yet, those are a narrow set of
circumstances.  Add armor, the odds change.  Add more people (on
both sides, to be fair) and the odds change.  Limit the ability of
the rapier to evade by making the fight take place in close
quarters, and the odds change.  

The fact is, any given swordfight depends a great deal on the
skill of the participants.  Environmental factors (including
choice of weapon) show themselves in the aggregate, but much less
so in individual matches.  

> So let's speculate.
> Your average wielder of a greatsword would be a soldier of the line, trained
> to fight in a line.  So I would speculate that the soldier would opt to not
> use his greatsword in a duel, prefering a faster, lighter blade.  But let's
> say he's foolish enough to go greatsword vs rapier.

Or desperate enough, as he may not have a choice, of course.

> On reach, well, the rapier fighter doesn't have a problem with that, given
> his speed advantage, and the fact that he can fight both in close, and has
> the lunge, which gives him equal, if not more, reach.  He just has to be
> careful not to step into any of the soldier's swings to parry.  Avoidance
> would be easiest and the best way to conserve energy while the soldier is
> expending it at a tremendous rate.  

Throwing around a greatsword takes energy, but not nearly as much
as you might expect if you know how to use it.  I don't, but I
know enough to use the balance of the blade to my advantage, and
that alone makes a big difference.

> The rapier fighter can go defensive and
> wait until greatsword-boy tires, or simply wait for a bit too much backswing
> and pow, 4 inches of slim sword blade enters the fellow's head.  And if
> greatswod-boy starts to use it as a thrusting weapon he's doomed, because
> now the rapier fighter can engage him blade to blade, pass-step and use his
> dagger.  

The greatsword can be used in a very similar move, nearly as fast
-- thrust, engage the blade far enough towards the hilt to prevent
a quick backstep, step in and strike with the pommel without ever
disengaging, then nail the opponent as he staggers backwards.  The
rapier can't easily strike cross-body with his dagger to counter.

Another effective tactic would be to begin with a disarm -- strike
at the rapier itself rather than the wielder.  Pin the blade, even
briefly, and you can snap it, or bend it sufficiently to reduce
its usefulness; advantage greatsword, from then on.  

In short...

it's never that simple.

-- 
Matthew Hunter (matthew at infodancer.org)
Homepage: http://matthew.infodancer.org/index.jsp
Public Key: http://matthew.infodancer.org/public_key.txt