HazmatMedic said
I mean, it hardly makes a difference if my soldiers are wielding Gladii or Wakizashis does it? They're both swords, both bladed and both are designed to kill. The only difference that it practically has is the time periods, but they look dramatically different aesthetically.
And to return to the cinquedea, is it really that much of an issue if we have cinquedeas rather than, say, daggers? They do the same job equally well and have the same strengths and weaknesses, just one looks prettier than the other.
No. Just.... No. Honestly, if you truly believe that then there's really no reason for you to ban anything in the RP. By your logic there, since you've allowed crossbows, then someone could come in with compound crosswbows, since you know, they're both crossbows, and they both shoot bolts at thing to kill them. The only difference is the time periods, right? I mean, it's not like one is more efficient and just overall better than the other one, or that one utilizes materials that was previously unavailable when the other was made.
Right, now that we're going to be looking at this with history and reality. There is a massive difference between Gladii and Wakizashis. First and most glaring of these differences is the purpose either blade is meant for. Gladii are meant for lunging and stabbing. Wakizashi are meant for cutting and slashing. While you can slash with a Gladii, and you can stab with a Wakizashi, that is not what either is meant to do and your strikes will be ineffectual at best, and probably show your fighter off as desperate. Second of differences here, and perhaps the thing that is truly the worst of this ruling, is the construction of the blades. Gladii can be made from bronze, iron, or steel with the material only affecting the durability of the blade and the cutting edge. Wakizashi on the other hand, are made of specially forged steel, using techniques that are beyond what our civilizations should be capable in this era. Without using this steel, a bronze or iron blade, even perhaps a steel blade of the era, would be incapable of sustaining the structural integrity of the blade, and result in a vastly shortened life-span of the weapon.
There is also the point in which some weapons simply are better at killing than others, in that everyone should know that japanese blades were notorious for being sharp enough to cut into armor and many times through bone if enough power was put behind them. That is because of the construction of the blade and the quality of the material being used allowing the craftsmen to forge a cutting tool far superior to the weapon you have compared it to. This is because steel was very much a thing in the 14th century and later, allowing for the widespread use of this material in the creation of arms for the militaries of the time. Flashback to the 5th century, and steel is almost non-existent for how little it is used, since bloomeries were the only method of forging the metal.
So yeah, the ruling needs reversed to 5th Century, and only 5th Century. That is what you advertised in your interest check, and that is what we are here for. I'm pretty sure no one joined the RP expecting to have their 5th Century nation go up against plate-wearing assholes with katanas. Seriously.
