Weapon Geometry
From LSWiki
(Difference between revisions)
| Revision as of 14:00, 12 June 2017 (edit) Fungor (Talk | contribs) (added a tab) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 16:10, 12 June 2017 (edit) Fungor (Talk | contribs) (changes) Next diff → |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | Some data points about weapons weight. | + | Hypothesis (read as: my whiny complaint) |
| + | *Giant Hammers are stupidly heavy and it's dumb and upsets me and I want someone to change it so that I can use them without large encumbrance penalties. | ||
| + | *my reasoning | ||
| + | **Axe = stick with a heavy wedge on it | ||
| + | **Mace = stick with a heavy turd on it | ||
| + | **Hammer = stick with a heavy cylinder on it | ||
| + | **I expect a hammer or mace to weigh more than an axe, but not massively so, probably between 1 and 2 times the mass on the striking end, with a comparable haft, the biggest difference being the shape of the striking surface. | ||
| + | **A weapon that is weighs vastly more than a sword for example, shouldn't fall into the same "size" category despite being of comparable size. (I can swing a 15 foot pool noodle with more accuracy and speed than I can a 5 foot solid iron bar, this would still be true if I was strong enough to lift said bar) | ||
| + | **A weapon scaled up for use by a larger/stronger wielder would have a longer haft, comparable sturdiness (technology permitting) and would probably weigh more, but I would still expect axes, maces, and hammers to maintain constant relative weights as they scaled up. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Process | ||
| + | *I collected some weapons and looked at them while holding them. | ||
| + | *Here be some data points about weapon weights. | ||
| ==Tremendous== | ==Tremendous== | ||
| Line 12: | Line 24: | ||
| *Og Stuff | *Og Stuff | ||
| Giant Iron Hammer 277.50 1.95 across, 12 long (from the smith) | Giant Iron Hammer 277.50 1.95 across, 12 long (from the smith) | ||
| - | Giant Club 117.00 2.75 across, 23.5 long | + | Giant Wooden Club 117.00 2.75 across, 23.5 long |
| Giant black oak staff 61.20 1.80 across, 27 long (Bilga, material probably varies) | Giant black oak staff 61.20 1.80 across, 27 long (Bilga, material probably varies) | ||
| Giant Obsidian Axe 48.75 0.7 wide, 20 long | Giant Obsidian Axe 48.75 0.7 wide, 20 long | ||
| Line 43: | Line 55: | ||
| *Storm Rock | *Storm Rock | ||
| Bronze Great Flail 28.45 0.60 across, 12 long | Bronze Great Flail 28.45 0.60 across, 12 long | ||
| - | Bronze Greataxe 27.15 0.85 wide, 12.5 long | + | Bronze Greataxe 27.15 0.85 wide, 12.5 long |
| Mithril Greataxe 8.79 0.65 wide, 14 long | Mithril Greataxe 8.79 0.65 wide, 14 long | ||
| *LH Grebor's Smithy | *LH Grebor's Smithy | ||
| Line 56: | Line 68: | ||
| Bronze Flail 20.85 0.70 across, 6.40 long | Bronze Flail 20.85 0.70 across, 6.40 long | ||
| Mithril Flail 15.45 0.70 across, 6.45 long | Mithril Flail 15.45 0.70 across, 6.45 long | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | Hypothesis (read as: my whiny complaint) | ||
| - | *Hammers are stupidly heavy and it's dumb and upsets me and I want someone to change it. | ||
| - | *Axe = stick with a heavy blade on it | ||
| - | *Mace = stick with a heavy turd on it | ||
| - | *Hammer = stick with a heavy cylinder on it | ||
| - | *I expect a hammer or mace's weight relative to an axe's to be between 1.0 and 1.5ish? | ||
| - | *If I made a "bigger" weapon for a larger/stronger wielder I'd use a longer haft and a heavier blade/turd/cylinder but expect the weight ratios to stay the same. Unless I was in Azeroth. | ||
| - | |||
| - | Process | ||
| - | *I collected some weapons and looked at them while holding them. | ||
| Conclusions | Conclusions | ||
| - | *Material obviously plays a huge role in weight, compare Giant fiery steel mace with Hlerbani for a 90kg difference, or adamantite vs. fiery steel weapons. | + | *Material obviously plays a role in determining the weight, the dimensions also vary, which is weird and confusing. |
| - | *A lot of weapons don't have distinct haft-materials, this can affect different weapons more or less based on geometry. I have no idea to what degree this matters. | + | *Material seems to have a larger effect on lighter weapons than heavier ones: A Giant Fiery Steel Hammer weighs 27% more than the comparable adamantite one, Meanwhile the GFS Sword weighs 59% more than it's adamantite equivalent. |
| - | *Weapon size category either has nothing, or very little to do with weight. (this isn't a surprise, but it's dumb is what I'm saying). | + | **Of course, their dimensions differ. And I have relatively few data points to actually consider which makes this not very conclusive of anything. |
| - | *Square Cube rule seems to be affecting certain weapons more than others as their dimensions are scaled up. ((Great Hammer) = 2.45 * (Greatsword). (Giant Hammer) = 12.78 * (Giant Sword) lolwat) | + | *A lot of weapons don't have distinct haft-materials, this can affect different weapons more or less based on geometry. I don't know to what degree this matters, but I imagine the biggest impact would be in swords and pole arms. |
| + | *Weapon size category either has nothing, or very little to do with weight. This more or less makes sense, since Travelers, kazarzeth and Lightbringers can have giant weapons that weigh practically nothing. | ||
| + | *Square Cube rule seems to be affecting certain weapons more than others as their dimensions are scaled up. (Great Hammer/Great Sword=2.45, Giant Hammer/Giant Sword=12.78 lolwat) | ||
| + | *Weapon design is hugely dependent on history and technology, so it's hard to imagine what a fantasy bludgeon for a significantly-larger than human race (in a magic infused world no less) might actually look like. From a modeling perspective, it could very well make sense that a hammer used by a giant weighs ten times that of a sword used by the same giant. But from a gameplay perspective, Hammers are basically furniture right now unless we spend hours painstakingly infusing them, and that's a bummer. | ||
| + | *Giant hammers/maces/scourges should have their geometry modified until their weight is more comparable to giant axes. So says I. | ||
| Not addressed here | Not addressed here | ||
| *There are a lot of materials that are practically weightless, and that's also dumb nonsense. | *There are a lot of materials that are practically weightless, and that's also dumb nonsense. | ||
| *Weapon weight doesn't directly impact ratings while using it (aside from encumbering you), that's also weird. (maybe it does actually, just speculation on my part) | *Weapon weight doesn't directly impact ratings while using it (aside from encumbering you), that's also weird. (maybe it does actually, just speculation on my part) | ||
Revision as of 16:10, 12 June 2017
Hypothesis (read as: my whiny complaint)
- Giant Hammers are stupidly heavy and it's dumb and upsets me and I want someone to change it so that I can use them without large encumbrance penalties.
- my reasoning
- Axe = stick with a heavy wedge on it
- Mace = stick with a heavy turd on it
- Hammer = stick with a heavy cylinder on it
- I expect a hammer or mace to weigh more than an axe, but not massively so, probably between 1 and 2 times the mass on the striking end, with a comparable haft, the biggest difference being the shape of the striking surface.
- A weapon that is weighs vastly more than a sword for example, shouldn't fall into the same "size" category despite being of comparable size. (I can swing a 15 foot pool noodle with more accuracy and speed than I can a 5 foot solid iron bar, this would still be true if I was strong enough to lift said bar)
- A weapon scaled up for use by a larger/stronger wielder would have a longer haft, comparable sturdiness (technology permitting) and would probably weigh more, but I would still expect axes, maces, and hammers to maintain constant relative weights as they scaled up.
Process
- I collected some weapons and looked at them while holding them.
- Here be some data points about weapon weights.
Tremendous
Name weight geometry given *Sinbyen shimmering violet adamantite weapons Giant Hammer 172.00 2 across, 12.5 long Giant Scythe 76.80 0.95 across, 26 long Giant Axe 57.35 1.35 wide, 22 long Giant Flail 72.60 1.03 across, 18.5 long Giant Spear 23.35 0.45 across, 31.5 long Giant Sword 13.45 0.8 wide, 0.15 tall, 23.5 long *Og Stuff Giant Iron Hammer 277.50 1.95 across, 12 long (from the smith) Giant Wooden Club 117.00 2.75 across, 23.5 long Giant black oak staff 61.20 1.80 across, 27 long (Bilga, material probably varies) Giant Obsidian Axe 48.75 0.7 wide, 20 long Giant Iron Sword 37.70 0.95 wide, 0.20 tall, 22 long *Musspleheim Giant Fiery Steel Mace 292.50 2.20 across, 12 long ... Hammer 218.50 0.90 across, 12 long ... Axe 87.85 1.40 wide, 21.5 long ... Sword 21.40 0.85 wide, 0.20 tall, 23 long Giant Blackwood Staff 24.35 1.75 across, 27 long Hlerbani 201.50 2.35 across, 13 long (oak and lodestone mace) Eldrsleggja 68.55 2.15 across, 13 long (fiery granite hammer, 1/3rd the weight of other hammers?) *Shadow Tower Ektharnor Gadel 189.00 3.35 across, 21 long (Giant Scourge) *Kazarithaxai I'm too small to test.
Great
Name weight geometry given *Sinbyen black adamantite weapons Great Flail 17.85 0.65 across, 12.5 long Great Hammer 17.45 0.7 across, 10.5 long Greataxe 9.04 0.65 wide, 14 long Greatspear 8.25 0.3 across, 26.5 long Greatsword 7.10 0.65 wide, 0.15 tall, 18.5 long *Shadow Tower Vorpal Blade 3.68 0.65 wide, 0.15 tall, 18.5 long Magma Maul 21.35 0.95 across, 9.90 long Singularity Staff 17.40 0.35 across, 21.5 long Daemonicus Omega 26.55 0.95 wide, 20.5 long (Reanada Halberd) *Storm Rock Bronze Great Flail 28.45 0.60 across, 12 long Bronze Greataxe 27.15 0.85 wide, 12.5 long Mithril Greataxe 8.79 0.65 wide, 14 long *LH Grebor's Smithy Iron Greatsword 19.85 0.80 wide, 0.20 tall, 17 long
Medium or whatever
Name weight geometry given *Shadow Tower Heavensfire 0.23 0.15 wide, 14.5 long (Longsword?) Qith's Morning Star 9.95 0.85 across, 5.70 long Mithril Spear 5.30 0.20 across, 21.5 long (reanada staticload) *Storm Rock misc Bronze Flail 20.85 0.70 across, 6.40 long Mithril Flail 15.45 0.70 across, 6.45 long
Conclusions
- Material obviously plays a role in determining the weight, the dimensions also vary, which is weird and confusing.
- Material seems to have a larger effect on lighter weapons than heavier ones: A Giant Fiery Steel Hammer weighs 27% more than the comparable adamantite one, Meanwhile the GFS Sword weighs 59% more than it's adamantite equivalent.
- Of course, their dimensions differ. And I have relatively few data points to actually consider which makes this not very conclusive of anything.
- A lot of weapons don't have distinct haft-materials, this can affect different weapons more or less based on geometry. I don't know to what degree this matters, but I imagine the biggest impact would be in swords and pole arms.
- Weapon size category either has nothing, or very little to do with weight. This more or less makes sense, since Travelers, kazarzeth and Lightbringers can have giant weapons that weigh practically nothing.
- Square Cube rule seems to be affecting certain weapons more than others as their dimensions are scaled up. (Great Hammer/Great Sword=2.45, Giant Hammer/Giant Sword=12.78 lolwat)
- Weapon design is hugely dependent on history and technology, so it's hard to imagine what a fantasy bludgeon for a significantly-larger than human race (in a magic infused world no less) might actually look like. From a modeling perspective, it could very well make sense that a hammer used by a giant weighs ten times that of a sword used by the same giant. But from a gameplay perspective, Hammers are basically furniture right now unless we spend hours painstakingly infusing them, and that's a bummer.
- Giant hammers/maces/scourges should have their geometry modified until their weight is more comparable to giant axes. So says I.
Not addressed here
- There are a lot of materials that are practically weightless, and that's also dumb nonsense.
- Weapon weight doesn't directly impact ratings while using it (aside from encumbering you), that's also weird. (maybe it does actually, just speculation on my part)
