John the OFM  | 16 Jul 2012 8:19 p.m. PST |
I'm not talking about huge surfbard size words. Yes, they are truly dumb, but manageable. Maybe. The ones that honk me off are the ones with multiple spurs and cutting surfaces on the blade. What is the point of that? Wouldn't they interfere with a drawing stroke (to put it mildly)? |
| Jovian1 | 16 Jul 2012 8:39 p.m. PST |
|
| Sergeant Paper | 16 Jul 2012 8:52 p.m. PST |
Some could be blade-catchers, but most are just bad 'art'
|
| Toshach | 16 Jul 2012 8:55 p.m. PST |
|
| Lion in the Stars | 16 Jul 2012 8:57 p.m. PST |
Some of them even have edges! They look mean. The extra points are 'looks-cool' modifications of the parrying hooks on a zweihander. Most of them have such horrible stress-concentrations that the blade would not survive the proofing strikes. |
| Mardaddy | 16 Jul 2012 9:00 p.m. PST |
Art. Meant to appear imposing and therefore "cool." Fans of this "cool" would probably half-heartedly justify the style as doing, "extra damage" on the haymaker-hack or over-the-head-extreme-cleave. |
| HammerHead | 16 Jul 2012 9:34 p.m. PST |
|
Parzival  | 16 Jul 2012 9:43 p.m. PST |
You mean like this one? link 
|
| Mako11 | 16 Jul 2012 11:50 p.m. PST |
I think you are forgetting the most important word in your question, e.g. "fantasy"
Trying to rationalize anything otherwise leads to madness. |
Chocolate  | 17 Jul 2012 2:03 a.m. PST |
|
Chef Lackey Rich  | 17 Jul 2012 4:25 a.m. PST |
The late Professor Barker (of Empire of the Petal Throne fame) wrote a whole article on why Tekumel swords have weird spikes and hooks and such, including a bit on the subject of stowing them when not in use. You should see if you can hunt up a copy – it raises some good points about the kind of elaborations on a theme any craft develops if it lasts long enough – and the poor saps on Tekumel (a metal-starved planet trapped in a pocket dimension) have been using their chlen-hide blades for tens of thousands of years. That doesn't explain other settings' weird swords, but maybe it's a starting point for doing so. |
| Dynaman8789 | 17 Jul 2012 5:38 a.m. PST |
The rule of cool. Only explanation possible. |
| The Beast Rampant | 17 Jul 2012 6:27 a.m. PST |
Haven't we already done this one? Aren't we up to "chainmail bikini" in the rotation again? |
John the OFM  | 17 Jul 2012 6:36 a.m. PST |
I think you are forgetting the most important word in your question, e.g. "fantasy"
I have not reconciled myself to the truism that "fantasy = dumb = anything goes". |
| Lion in the Stars | 17 Jul 2012 6:39 a.m. PST |
You're missing an important element in that equation, John. BAD fantasy = anything goes. Good Fantasy has thought through the implications of what's going to happen when there are magitech weapons approximating modern artillery on the field (or whatever). |
| Klebert L Hall | 17 Jul 2012 6:44 a.m. PST |
Ask somebody from SE Asia; they developed at least equally moronic weapons IRL. -Kle. |
Tgerritsen  | 17 Jul 2012 7:21 a.m. PST |
Sounds like you answered your own question- there are several points to them, which seems to be your beef. |
| richarDISNEY | 17 Jul 2012 7:49 a.m. PST |
Like the "Tri-Sword"?
 |
| Dan 055 | 17 Jul 2012 8:35 a.m. PST |
To be the envy of all your friends of course. |
| Dantes Cellar | 17 Jul 2012 8:59 a.m. PST |
@John the OFM That's the rub. There isn't a truism "fantasy = dumb = anything goes". That sounds/reads more like a product of an opinion being projected on an element within the fantasy genre. Truth be told, "fantasy = anything goes" is probably much closer to what it should be like in that genre. Why else call it fantasy if we continually spoil it with reality? There is no Authoritative Guide to the True Definition of What Fantasy Is and Isn't (TM) that serves as a Universal Truth and because of the diversity of imagination, we have things like swords with multiple prong-thingies. We also have an overabundance of ridiculously large hands on many fantasy miniatures, which I think is dumb. Multiple prong-thingies or ridiculously large hands, dumb or not, the bottom line is, our opinions are just that. They make something within a fantasy genre neither right nor wrong for anyone but ourselves. |
| Feet up now | 17 Jul 2012 9:16 a.m. PST |
Those sharp sticky-out bits are handy if your Bat'leth should break YouTube link |
| 53Punisher | 17 Jul 2012 1:27 p.m. PST |
I agree with the fantasy art angle. The old GW Lost & the Damned and Realm of Chaos books have some really insane sword illustrations. Not only blade types, but grips, pommels, etc. as well. |
| M C MonkeyDew | 17 Jul 2012 1:50 p.m. PST |
I don't mind the dumb ones. It's the ones that won't stop talking that really annoy me. |
| Zephyr1 | 17 Jul 2012 2:37 p.m. PST |
"The ones that honk me off are the ones with multiple spurs and cutting surfaces on the blade. What is the point of that?" +2 Intimidation Factor |
| Farstar | 17 Jul 2012 3:37 p.m. PST |
|
| Lion in the Stars | 17 Jul 2012 3:44 p.m. PST |
We also have an overabundance of ridiculously large hands on many fantasy miniatures, which I think is dumb. Depends on the minis, but a couple sculptors have said that it was a limit of the mold. They couldn't make the hands any smaller (and have them attached to the weapon), it reduced how many spins they could get out of the mold! |
| Milites | 17 Jul 2012 6:10 p.m. PST |
It matches their ridiculously spikey helmets and armour. In fact, some chaos warrior types should have to roll to prevent becoming entangled in their own kit. My favourites are the spike festooned hilts and cross pieces, must cost a fortune in replacing all the torn cloaks, not to mention the self-inflicted injuries when falling! |
| Dantes Cellar | 17 Jul 2012 7:04 p.m. PST |
@Lion in the Stars They don't really bother me--that much. I just think they looks a bit silly on some figures. ;-}~ I can see the point of the casting process though. Additionally, hands are historically one of the most difficult things to render accurately for many artists (at least that's what they told me when I was majoring in fine arts). |
20thmaine  | 18 Jul 2012 5:19 a.m. PST |
In their VFW range Minifigs had a figure of Hero (that was his name), armed with sucha weapon (actually they had two – the first version had a larger weapon and was too brittle when casting) Anyway – the decription was "Hero with Dragonslayer" All the hooks and curves were designed to get past the semi-magical defence of the Dragon scales. So, that's one practical reason for it. |
| HammerHead | 18 Jul 2012 12:13 p.m. PST |
I guess size dose matter after all bigger the better |
| Dunadan | 19 Jul 2012 8:32 a.m. PST |
Truth be told, "fantasy = anything goes" is probably much closer to what it should be like in that genre. Why else call it fantasy if we continually spoil it with reality? Someone whose opinion on the matter carries much weight might have something to say about that. Just replace 'green sun' with 'ridiculously spiky sword' or 'chainmail bikini' in the two paragraphs below: Fantasy has also an essential drawback: it is difficult to achieve. Fantasy may be, as I think, not less but more sub-creative; but at any rate it is found in practice that "the inner consistency of reality" is more difficult to produce, the more unlike are the images and the rearrangements of primary material to the actual arrangements of the Primary World. It is easier to produce this kind of "reality" with more "sober" material. Fantasy thus, too often, remains undeveloped; it is and has been used frivolously, or only half-seriously, or merely for decoration: it remains merely "fanciful." Anyone inheriting the fantastic device of human language can say the green sun. Many can then imagine or picture it. But that is not enough—though it may already be a more potent thing than many a "thumbnail sketch" or "transcript of life" that receives literary praise.To make a Secondary World inside which the green sun will be credible, commanding Secondary Belief, will probably require labour and thought, and will certainly demand a special skill, a kind of elvish craft. Few attempt such difficult tasks. But when they are attempted and in any degree accomplished then we have a rare achievement of Art: indeed narrative art, story-making in its primary and most potent mode. -JRR Tolkien, On Fairy Stories, emphasis mine John the OFM is in good company |
Sgt Slag  | 19 Jul 2012 9:01 a.m. PST |
$Money.$ All that matters is that it sells product. |
| Dantes Cellar | 19 Jul 2012 11:47 a.m. PST |
@Dunadan Thanks for sharing that. Still, what I'm interpreting from that passage is that fantasy--good fantasy--isn't spoiled by what *we* know in our lives as "reality". It should have its own "Secondary Belief" (an alternate "reality") in order to make the fantasy believable. Here's a short anecdote to illustrate my earlier point: A dear friend ran a home-brew RPG for years for the same guys. A new guy eventually joined the group and during a game, his character fell into a classic pit trap. The GM asked him, "What do you do?" The player's response was, "Wait--what do you mean? I don't have time to do anything. How long am I falling for?" The GM responded, "Oh, a couple of seconds. Three or four." The player then whipped out a calculator and started doing computations. It should be noted at this time that the player had a doctorate in Physics. The player responded (if memory serves me well), "That means that the pit is 150' deep to which the GM replied, "Gravity's different on my world." The guy didn't know how to respond and just sat there for several minutes. Our "reality" is more of a detriment to suspension of disbelief at times when it comes to fantasy. It's a filter through which we instinctively run everything and that clouds the notion that things are just different in other worlds. When I think of fantasy, I don't care (very often) about the physics of a world or why a sword has multiple prongs. I assume there's a reason for those things and if the author provides me with the hows and whys, all the better. Otherwise I simply want to escape and enjoy (or not) the idea of the alternate world as told or shared. At any rate, John the OFM, good post. Dunadan, great food for thought. |
| Dunadan | 19 Jul 2012 12:18 p.m. PST |
When I think of fantasy, I don't care (very often) about the physics of a world or why a sword has multiple prongs. I assume there's a reason for those things and if the author provides me with the hows and whys, all the better. Otherwise I simply want to escape and enjoy (or not) the idea of the alternate world as told or shared. Right. I'm behind you all the way in enjoying escapist entertainment. What Tolkien is saying, in more erudite and authoritative words than mine, is that Fantasy can be used to invoke the Rule of Cool, but that the two should not be equated. Justifying spiky swords with, "It's fantasy!" rather than, "It's awesome!" blurs the distinction between the different kinds of fantasy, and drags things like The Lord of the Rings or The Book of the New Sun down to the level of Warhammer and D&D. Both have their place, but to borrow from sci-fi terminology, it would be like saying there is no difference between 'Hard Fantasy' and 'Elf Opera'. |
| Dantes Cellar | 19 Jul 2012 2:57 p.m. PST |
Elf Opera: I see a little silhouetto of a flange Scottish voulge! Scottish voulge! What is that damned spur for? It was made for spiking, very very frightening EEK! rofl
Sorry, couldn't resist. |
| Dunadan | 20 Jul 2012 7:20 p.m. PST |
|
| Karpathian | 20 Jul 2012 7:35 p.m. PST |
Such swords as John refers to are the Fantasy equivalent of Swiss Army knives: an attachment for everything.
|
| Lion in the Stars | 21 Jul 2012 2:11 a.m. PST |
Dantes Cellar for the win! |