What now, rapierfags? The rapier is mathematically and physi

If they're so good then why did they stop using them?
/thread

File: knightfags BTFO.jpg (262KB, 2752x1080px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 2752x1080px

>>33596607

rapier is for stabbing in small gaps in armor, sword is for bashing fuckers faces in, but also slashing if you find some unarmored folks.

>>33597001
bc guns man..

>>33597198
>rapier is for stabbing in small gaps in armor
that's what a dagger is for
you dont use a rapier against armour

rapier developed mainly to fill the role of a duel/self-defence weapon for civilians where armour wasn't common, or was light (cloth/leather, stabbable) although it was used in battles because guns drove armour out of the window making it comparatively good to longswords

also it was light to carry

educate yourself peasant

File: 1489242655623.jpg (664KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

664KB, 720x960px

I don't think that's the conclusion you should draw from that (and it's one the author may not agree to in the slightest). Rather that the different swords are made to be used in different ways.

The kind of agility illustrated there cuts both ways. The easier it is for you to displace your sword, the easier it is for your opponent to displace your sword.

With rapier fencing tending to go from a starting point where you already have blade contact, that'd seem to be a pretty huge deal. While earlier forms of fencing where such isn't the case will have less blade contact in general, and thus shift focus somewhat (allowing for a huge amount of personal preference on both sides here) from stability to agility.

File: Wallace collection rapiers.gif (12KB, 1145x636px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 1145x636px

>>33597257
>also it was light to carry

Rapiers aren't particularly light (some specific rapiers are, but there are those that are decidedly heavy as well, and plenty around the quite hefty range), and they frequently have very large guards that are relatively cumbersome to drag around.

Now the rapier did come form a sword that was a lighter "daily carry" one for when you weren't really expecting a full battle. However, that aspect got lost quite quickly as the espada ropera became the rapier proper, and in the end we see plenty of people bringing rapiers along to the battlefield, with plenty of heavily armoured cuirassiers riding around to provide well armoured targets.

Now the rapier wouldn't at large have been shaped as a dedicated armour-piercer either of course, so >>33597198 is quite off as well IMO.

>>33597267

>Rather that the different swords are made to be used in different ways.

This exactly. A rapier does its job as a rapier and a great sword does its job as a great sword. You dont look at one and laugh about how bad it is because it cant mash armor or how it cant be used with proper finesse.

Bitching about how a rapier isnt like a great sword is like bitching about how a rapier isnt an axe.

>>33597301

>Now the rapier wouldn't at large have been shaped as a dedicated armour-piercer either of course, so >>33597198 is quite off as well IMO.
Now, that would be Estoc, if I'm not mistaken.
Oakeshott type XV as well?

Still, I'm partial to type X, XI, XIII, XX... I like me some heft to a blade.

File: Executioner 1.jpg (26KB, 809x259px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 809x259px

>>33597440
Estoc probably, XV may be more of a general use, pointy tip if you need it, more width further down, possibly developing into the XVIII in order to keep the tip and get a bit more width a bit further up.

>X, XI, XIII, XX... I like me some heft to a blade.

Those give you width (which I'm often fond of too). Which sometimes, but not always, translates to heft. At the same time, a narrow blade can have a good amount of heft to it, most swept hilt rapiers I've held have been in that category.

Swords are very much three dimensional, the profile is never the full picture.

In the modern day, the only long blade you should be using is a knife or machete. No real reason to have a rapier, claymore, katana, dao, or any of that other shit anymore. Too heavy, too bulky, and they don't really solve any problems that a gun can't solve. At least the knife and machete can be used to cut whatever you need to cut.

rapier is for thrusts with long reach, so exactly what it does best.

>>33597475
Well, I just like choppy blades. But yeah, swords and even knives are three-dimensional, but man oh man, how much more complicated axes are. But many people ignore cross-section and distal taper, that is true.
I'm currently forging something of a type XIII or maybe XIV, quite short, I'll probably stop at about 70cm of blade length as I'm a bit limited in what I can harden, but man, will it be wide. Currently it's about 1cm thick and 4,8cm at it's narrowest point, not including the tip. Affraid that I'll have to cut off some material so it isn't too heavy, hah! Just got back from the smithy, so off to shower with me.

File: autism 304.jpg (14KB, 304x305px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 304x305px

>>33596607
>giving a single flying fuck about fucking swords
>ever

>>33597479
Well, pretty much, but there's collecting and historical interest. But machetes are meh. Give me a cleaver or even better, an axe. Axe can be a wonderfully versatile tool. Last fall I fell a tree, chopped it into firewood, made a shelter, a bench to sit on, made an impromptu cutting board, peeled and sliced veggies, cubed some meat, carved a few skewers and made some shashliks, all without ever using a knife. Only thing I didn't do with it is hunt the pig and start the fire, heh. A sharp axe goes a long way.

>>33597001
Because armies stopped using armor, you know with guns on the battlefield and all. If some rich twat wanted a duel with a rapier you just put on armor and he might as well use a toothpick.

>>33597572
>autistic child
>says the tripfag with extra serving of autism

File: IMG_2958.jpg (327KB, 866x1250px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 866x1250px

>>33597592
There was still plenty of armour around in the rapier's time, the great fade-out of it is rather towards the end of the rapier's service life.

>>33597572
Because stocking yourself with outdated collectible rifles is any less autistic

>>33597603
Full armor was rare and exclusive to cavalary, also the rapier was a secondary weapon for infantry.

>>33597590
>Well, pretty much, but there's collecting and historical interest.

No! You must never acknowledge that! All weapons are for killing people, only, or he might not be an elite 3I AA sheepish dog operator simply because he's got an interest in guns. He'd be just another geek! So everyone who has an interest in swords must think they're great for fighting with today.

File: IMG_2828.jpg (142KB, 625x1158px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 625x1158px

>>33597626
>also the rapier was a secondary weapon for infantry.

I guess someone forgot to tell Pappenheim. Or Gustav II Adolf. Or all the other noblemen who washed to be seen as great warriors, and thus had their portraits painted in full armour and with a rapier at their hip. Or the curators of the Army Museum in Stockholm. Or whoever identified the one on the left here as a cavalry weapon for the Heeresgeschichtliches Museum in Vienna.

Also given that cavalry did run into infantry on occasion, it'd stand to reason that the infantrymen may prefer it if their assorted armaments were reasonably useful in that situation as well.

File: IMG_0237.jpg (23KB, 225x224px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 225x224px

>>33596607
>What now, rapierfags?

>>33596607
Aren't Rapiers mostly dueling weapons anyway?

>>33597756
Mostly. That's what they're good at.

File: 20_Swedish_Infantry.gif (50KB, 1035x935px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 1035x935px

>>33597700
Look at all these swordsmen

>>33597267
>The kind of agility illustrated there cuts both ways. The easier it is for you to displace your sword, the easier it is for your opponent to displace your sword.

Are you implying a rapier would be more powerful in a bind than a longsword? Noswords detected.

>>33597756
>>33597344
Try tellingn that to all the people flooding sword threads claiming how the rapier is the übersword for any setting, situation and context.
I keep telling them RPGs aren't a good source of knowledge, but they don't listen.

File: IMG_0058.jpg (76KB, 845x845px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 845x845px

>>33597572
Was having a great day, and then I realized that you're still alive.

>>33598228
Hmm. Curious. What would be the most universal sword?
>inb4 arming sword
Too simple of a guard if we're thinking sword alone, without a shield. How about a backsword? Choppy, nice point and good hand protection?

>>33598213
Yeah I figured
>>33598228
Well look they can cite vidya gaems all they fucking want but we're talking reality here and the reality of this reality is that rapiers are pretty much dueling weapons,
Besides what kind of self respecting RPG doesn't have a long or greatsword as the best weapon?

>>33598319
One that has axes.
Banter aside, Shad from Shadiversity actually made a nice video about RPG's mistakingly calling certain swords longswords (instead of arming swords) and greatswords (instead of longswords / swords of war) etc. That's a thing that should be adressed as well.

File: De Gheyn, Musketier, 1608. 8a.jpg (220KB, 873x1200px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 873x1200px

>>33597756
Duels at the time were often a bit less formal than we'd imagine today, in many cases leaning more towards street brawls or assassinations. Formal ones may not have been unheard of at the time, but they don't really become the big thing until the rapier is on its way out IIRC.

As for the rapier, it doesn't seem to have been a sword that anyone meant for any one particular task, it was simply a single handed sword, to be used whenever a sword was called for.

The connection between rapiers and duelling is probably mostly a thing of matinee movies.

>>33598214
Artwork? I can do artwork. Looks like eight of them have swords there btw, and G at least appears to have gone for a rapier, though the artist didn't exactly give us a good look at the swords, or any other detail for that matter. Perhaps that's all you need for some 1/72-1/76-wecan'tbearsedtochoose scale wargame figures.


>>33598228
>Are you implying a rapier would be more powerful in a bind than a longsword? Noswords detected.

Like the Devil reads the Bible.

No, the single hander isn't going to win any leverage match against a (largely) two hander. But make that longsword with the mass distribution of a rapier, so that it gets an agility figure more akin to the rapier in OP's pic than the longsword there, and you should end up with something with a good deal more stability and authority in the bind than a normal longsword.

File: IMG_2937.jpg (300KB, 880x1398px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 880x1398px

Or if somethign based on a bit more modern research is preferred.

File: 1491684173514.jpg (75KB, 638x638px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 638x638px

>>33597572
>giving a single fuck what a tripnigger says
>ever

>>33598441

The guy said swords were not the primary arm but the sidearm. As in their primary function was to be a musketeer/arquebusier, a pikeman, ectera.

And lo and behold:

>>33598441
Musketeer/Arquebusier

>>33598449
Musketieer

>>33598460
Man drawing sword just droppedh is pike

>>33598504
Musketeer.

File: Archduke Albert of Austria 1600-10.jpg (572KB, 781x1024px) Image search: [Google]

572KB, 781x1024px

>>33598553
>The guy said swords were not the primary arm but the sidearm.

Well, that rather goes for all swords in the time period, so hardly something of relevance to when and why the rapier was used instead of, say, longswords or falchions.

Whether cavalry would touch the thing, or if infantry would care about dealing with armour foes I guess that to >>33597700 we can add that I doubt William I of Orange-Nassau or Archduke Albert would consider themselves infantrymen.

>>33598308
In my opinion side swords. The Munich town guard side sword is a great example. As far as Oakeshott typology goes I believe the XVIII is the most versatile out of the bunch.

>>33598441
Rapier cultist opinions will be disregarded from this point on. Good night.

>>33596607
The point of balance, center of rotation and weight distribution are all geared for the very specific style of fencing used when wielding a rapier. There is nothing wrong with its tighter handling characteristics because the primary means of attack is the pointy end, not the sharpy edge.

File: rapiers.jpg (57KB, 438x1216px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 438x1216px

>>33598726
As far as I'm concerned, the rapier-sidesword split is a completely artificial line drawn worryingly close to the fat part of a bell curve just so that people can keep thinking rapiers are needle-slim and of no military use despite whatever reality may suggest.

So that "Munich town guard sword" for example... Yep, that's a rapier. And funnily enough one that the Army Museum in Stockholm associates with Pappenheim's cavalry men.

>>33598747
Backsword and broadsword > gaypier
Fucking rapists man

No beef though, I do none of these, just Fiore

>>33598849
>gaypier

Said the guy learning fencing from a herbarium.

File: ! angry Friulian who hates working joints.jpg (12KB, 300x252px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 300x252px

>>33598904
>not realising how scary it would be to see a bearded man called flower breaking every joint he comes across.

File: 06_English_troops.gif (76KB, 1102x640px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1102x640px

>>33598441
My initial argument was that the rapier was olny a sidearm for infantry and I have never seen a single depiction of it being a primary weapon.

>>33598653
"All swords in the period"

File: bffbdfb.jpg (394KB, 1016x1356px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 1016x1356px

>>33598653

>>33598841
The nomenclature may be modern, but in their use and characteristics rapiers and side swords are definitely not the same tool.
Basically speaking most nomenclature in sword classification is modern, because to the people of the day a sword was a sword was a sword.

>>33597572
git out

File: images.duckduckgo.com(34).jpg (10KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 300x300px

That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Long Sword" bullshit that's going on in the HEMA right now. R deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.

I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine rapier in Francs for 2,400,000 Francs (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can pierce cut slabs of solid steel with my Rapier.

French and Italian smiths spend years working on a single rapier and hammer it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.

Rapiers are thrice as pointy as long swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can reach, a rapier can reach first. I'm pretty sure a rapier could easily impale a knight wearing full plate with a simple thrust.

Ever wonder why eastern Europe never bothered conquering the West? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined musketeers and their Rapiers of destruction. Even in modern France, Gendarmerie soldiers target the men with the rapiers first because their killing power is feared and respected.

So what am I saying? Rapiers are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better rules in HEMA. Here are the rule modifications I propose for Rapiers:

>>33599253
>No double hits if you're struck with a rapier first - they kill almost instantly. If a rapier wielder is struck, they have up to a full second to double hit. The superior killing power of the rapier must be respected

>No single-handed thrusting with long swords. It's not a practical tactic and has no support from the treatises. It's an ineffective tactic for the sword and gamey, it should not be allowed.

>Rapier users should be allowed an airsoft wheel lock pistol to represent their higher class and technological advantage over medieval peasants.

Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think?

tl;dr = Rapiers need to do more damage in HEMA, see my new rules.

>>33599253
Monsieur Ken?

File: 17th century hanger.jpg (35KB, 960x721px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 960x721px

>The graphs demonstrate agility by an oval and hourglass shapes. The shape and size of the oval describes the relative ease by which the hilt can be accelerated in a straight line in different directions.

So rapiers aren't as suitable for cutting as longswords, stop the presses.

I'm sure I won't get an answer to this but what exactly do you mean by "mathematically and physically inferior"? Are you just buttmad about all the recent rapier memeing? Because you could probably just come out and say that in a non-retarded way.

>>33597700
But his is not rapiers. This is side-swords.

>>33598653
>>33599019
>>33599033
What spanish rodeleros used was more on the sidesword side of renaissance swords (similar units were later employed in austria). They were unique as being one of the few troops that indeed used swords as main weapons, but they were never very numerous.