From: canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: What is with these Katana's?
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:24:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: burrhus.1992Sep1.152423.12438
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

In article <Btv3K7.Go9@news.cso.uiuc.edu> maxson@cerl.uiuc.edu (K R Maxson) writes:
>First, a general description of Japanese blademaking.  Then a general
>description (briefer, since I assume people are fairly familiar with it)
>of European blademaking.
>
>IN JAPAN
>
> [excellent description of japanese bladecraft deleted - I saved it :)]
>
>IN EUROPE
>
>Well, everyone knows about this.  Generally a homogenous bar
>was tempered similarly throughout its length, giving a sharp
>and brittle object or a blunt and tough one.  Pattern welding
>was not in use over more than 80% of the time that Japan was
>cranking out amazing swords.
>
>Of course, swordcraft in Europe was vastly different from 
>swordcraft in Japan.  Swords were in more common use, and did
>not have to be especially good to be used effectively to bop
>someone on their helmet.  Fighting techniques, both at the
>individual level and above; armor; economics; all of these things
>effected what was worthwhile to have in a sword.  In Japan,
>a high-precision instrument was more effective than a glorified
>club -- but it would have been a waste of time bothering with
>that high-precision instrument in Europe.

	Your description of Japanese sword making was excellent, and very
informative, but I think your description of European swords was a little
simplistic.  I won't try to give such a thoroughly detailed description of
the European sword making process, but will try to clear things up a
little.

	First off, the earliest Japanese swords were developed from Chinese
swords and were simply not very impressive.  By 300-400 AD the Japanese had
learned to temper swords to produce very low steel/steely iron.  The
current sword shape that is so well known, is atributed by legend (us
Folklore and Mythology majors gotta know these things!) to one Amakuni, but
in any case, the Japanese sword reached it's final shape around 1100 AD.
By 1300 AD very good swords were being made by the Japanese.  After 1600
AD, the swords became slightly smaller and shorter.
	Basically, the blades (as described in the deleted description)
were very hard-edged and resiliant, if not very flexible.

	Now in Europe, the Celts were forging iron weapons around 700 BC,
but it was not until 500 AD that really good pattern welded swords were
being made.  By 900 AD very good sword steel was being made.  So I don't
think it's quite fair to say tha "pattern welding was not in use over 80%
of the time that Japan was cranking out amazing swords", as this is clearly
not the case.
	A European sword certainly could be a glorified club, for as you
said economics and style influence sword construction.  But there was no
need for it to be and indeed a good sword was not.  And there are many very
finely crafted European swords.

>WHY DID I WRITE THIS?
>
>Actually, in terms of *DND, it doesn't matter at all.  As
>I've said before, the damage system is basically completely
>arbitrary anyway.  Just roll whatever dice float your boat.

	OK, perhaps it was foolish of me to wonder about the damage system
in AD&D.  Perhaps it is a foolish thing to try and work out some band-aid
rules that patch it up.  But I've always that the "long sword"/"broad
sword" distinction was silly, and the way they treat shamshirs/scimitars
was silly, and now the way they treat katanas is silly.
	All these swords are fine weapons, though designed for different
purposes.  Arbitrary damage aside, the differences in play ought to be seen
in fighting style and effectiveness versus armor (or lack thereof).  I'm
not trying to argue the supremacy of one weapon or technique over another
because I really don't believe such supremacies exist.
	I would like to patch up the combat system - heroics are all very
well but I'd like _some_ semblance of reality!

	Perhaps this really deserves a new thread if anyone thinks it's
worthwhile - like "Patching up AD&D Combat" or something.

Cheers,
Carl

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Edlund Anderson	            	"Hefi ek ok aldri sva reitt vapn
canders@isr.harvard.edu			at manni at eigi hafi vidh kommit."
OR
anderso2@husc.harvard.edu			- Skarphedhinn Njalsson 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd