Jump to content

Fighting styles of Knights in Westeros


Recommended Posts

I think the claim that 'maces, axes, and morning-stars were more effective and easier to use than a sword' isn't entirely correct. Not only is it quite a personal matter dependent on one's skill and strength- you need a damn strong arm for a mace to do much damage- but it's also quite dependent on the situation. Equally, seeming as to be really, really good with a sword- Jaime Lannister, Barristan Selmy level etc.- takes a lifetime of practice and dedication, there's a lot of prestige attached to being 'good with a sword'.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course. It's just a general statement, the devil is in the details.

And of course, bronze edges are way worse than steel edges. But we are talking about armor here.

When talking about armour, you're talking about the chance of a weapon piercing the armour (if you're not talking about blunt force). That chance is greater for a steel weapon against a bronze plate than the same against a steel plate. But, like I said, due to the varying quality of bronze and steel alloys, perhaps not by all that much.

I agree that the cost factor is probably more important for explaining why noone made bronze armour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the claim that 'maces, axes, and morning-stars were more effective and easier to use than a sword' isn't entirely correct. Not only is it quite a personal matter dependent on one's skill and strength- you need a damn strong arm for a mace to do much damage- but it's also quite dependent on the situation.

Of course things are dependent on situation. Every job has it's tool and all that. I certainly wouldn't choose a mace over a sword if facing lightly or un-armored foes. For that job, a sword is superior.

But against men in plate armor, maces and similar blunt weapons clearly were superior. In fact, you really need to use special techniques (e.g half-swording) to even be able to hurt a man in such armour with a sword. Attempting to cut through plate or even riveted mail is a lesson in futility and would likely get you killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Longclaw is said to be a "bastard" sword. This type of sword is made to use in the manner of the long-sword, that is without shield. A style of fighting which really only is possible once armour has developed to a certain level. Yet it has been in the Mormont family for 500 years. Something doesn't quite fit there.

It might have originally been planned as a great sword but they couldn't find enough Valyrean steel. It might have been designed for large weilders. I don't know but that point didn't seem particularly strange or anything to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It annoys so much that Martin describes "arming swords" (one-handed swords) as a "long swords". Long sword is a... well, a long sword. It is used with armor and two hands, while normal sword is paired with shield and lighter armor. When fighting from horseback, though, greatswords, poleaxes, lances and warhammers are usually the main weapons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It annoys so much that Martin describes "arming swords" (one-handed swords) as a "long swords". Long sword is a... well, a long sword. It is used with armor and two hands, while normal sword is paired with shield and lighter armor. When fighting from horseback, though, greatswords, poleaxes, lances and warhammers are usually the main weapons.

:bs:

Long sword is indeed a long sword. But what qualified for a long sword changed all the time. Most of the time, long sword actually denoted a spatha! Then the arming sword, later the bastard sword and finally the greatsword.

By the way, the long sword as in two-handed sword was used as much unarmored as armored. It did fairly well in both circumstances.

And I'd really like to see somebody using a poleaxe or greatsword while on horseback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to point out that there are several groups of westerosi who get in fights most often with un armored people. The Nights Watch fights the wildlings who have no armor and generally no horses. The Vale knights fight the mountain clans who have no armor, and the bulk of the infantry of common folk who get called up for a war don't seem to be given armor either.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the claim that 'maces, axes, and morning-stars were more effective and easier to use than a sword' isn't entirely correct. Not only is it quite a personal matter dependent on one's skill and strength- you need a damn strong arm for a mace to do much damage- but it's also quite dependent on the situation. Equally, seeming as to be really, really good with a sword- Jaime Lannister, Barristan Selmy level etc.- takes a lifetime of practice and dedication, there's a lot of prestige attached to being 'good with a sword'.

Because using a sword against someone in plate armour means you're effectively using it as a club. So the question is why not use an actual no shit metal club, a war hammer/mace?

GRRM is writing fiction, hence the emphasis on fancy sword play and the like. In reality this might be important when fighting duels but when it comes to no holds barred combat brute strength and good armour trump all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...