Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.14237806 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Given a choice of enchanted weapons with the same bonuses, would you go for something that looks unique or something plain?

>> No.14237817

Something plain. At least I could hope for some degree of subtlety and discretion when needed that way.

>> No.14237818

Plain. Easier to hide/disguise as a normal weapon, easier to keep safe from thieves and/or other party members.

>> No.14237822

why unique has to be equal to retarded looking, seriously

plain

>> No.14237823

Plain because I like to play as though I'm the underdog.

Having GLORIOUS SHINING SWORD kind of breaks that.

>> No.14237824

Are we allowed to choose what exactly it looks like if we pick unique?

I just want something that looks cool.

>> No.14237825

I'd "go for" something that doesn't look STUPID.

All your examples fail, btw.

>> No.14237831

Plain. Because functionality is automatically cooler. And not being instantly recognized is very functional.

>> No.14237835

Are we choosing what the unique sword looks like? If so, I go unique, and have it easily hidden - maybe some kind of foldaway blade.

Otherwise, plain.

>> No.14237847

plain:

its better to have your character be distinguished by personality/rollplay rather than the "cool" stuff he wears

unless your 12 years old in which case you just want cheesy unfunctional stuff

>> No.14237856

plain.

I have a pathological aversion to the hideously ugly "fantasy" swords that look like they were designed by a 5-year old with ADHD.

pic related. I challenge anyone to find a more elegantly proportioned weapon.

>> No.14237864

I'd go for the polearm. Seriously, I like swords, but I am tired of them.

>> No.14237868

>>14237835
This. If we get to play design-a-blade, I'll take something unique yet sensible.
Otherwise, just give me the normal looking one. Unless the different one dosen't look retarded.

>> No.14237900

If it's enchanted, it needs to look the part. Magic is often flashy.

>> No.14237901

>> No.14237910

Plain and unassuming.

I can just add a strap to the hilt or some shit later if I feel like it.

>> No.14237911

Bah. You have no sense of art design /tg/. Stylized please.

>> No.14237926

"Unique" almost entails that it would be bad, as if the design was any good, there would probably be more than one.
That said, a practical design, with bad-ass markings, runes that glow when the wielder is angry etc, are all up there, in the all good and fun tier. If however they look anything like any (exept maybe the middlemost sword) of the swords in OPs picture, then no. Plain it is.

>> No.14237930

>>14237806

I want something flashy, but not ridiculous.

Unless there is a reason the weapon "appears mundane" - I want it to obviously look enchanted.

However I'm more about what it appears to DO rather than how the object looks. I mean I don't need it to be a funny color with spikes everywhere. But made in an interesting shape or material, perhaps with it wreathed in a black flame or something, that's cool.

Low-magic fantasy has it's place. I just think no-one does it right. Everyone seems to be under the assumption the Dark->Medieval ages were ruled by a tyrannical dictator who forbade nudity, more that a few colors and, according to Oblivion, spears.

>> No.14237945

>>14237901
Wait what? The size of that sword is beyond insane!

>> No.14237967

Khopesh up in this mutherfuckas!

>rdsvis congáil

>> No.14237971

>>14237911
on the contrary, elegant simplicity has a design all of its own, compared to the ghastly excess of objects designed for looks before function.

and a sword should always be function before form.


>>14237926
here, morrowindfag, did you get the reply I gave when you were asking about the price for a greatsword, in the Fech/tg/uy thread a few days back?

-cutleranon.

>> No.14237987

I'd go for something that looks ridiculousy flashy and stupid. like the SORD>>14237824 pictured. people would laugh at your stupid sword with flashy outriger bits that glow in rainbow colours and look like it was drawn by a five year old. A weapon like that must surely be a useless peice of shit. only when it is too late and peircing their chest do they realise that is actually fairly decent.
Oh and the humilation of being killed by such a weapon would probably be a brilliant thing. A true trolls weapon

>> No.14237999

Unique. And by that I mean subtle things, like an engraving, maybe a moderately decorated hilt.

>> No.14238002

A standard sword (none of the retarded fantasy sword stuff) but perhaps with a more stylized pommel and hilt, nothing like glowing or on fire, just nice looking.

>> No.14238003

>>14237945
they're parade swords - the two larger ones are bearing swords - designed to be carried upright at parades, as symbolic swords of state or the city. Neither of them are sharp.

the smaller of the three might be a bearing sword, but if I recall from studying them (they're on display in alexandria, and were sourced from the hall of victories there), the smaller one might just have been a large two-hander, as its blade is sharp.

pic is a similar bearing sword, in the Scottish National Museum,

>> No.14238012

>>14237999
Exactly, Subtle things that differentiate it from just any sword but not something gaudy and outlandish like the swords in the OP's pic.

A Nice looking hilt and maybe some engraving on the blade.

>> No.14238025

i personally would want a sword that looks unique while still being simple, like a long sword whose blade has a dark flat finish so it wouldn't glint or reflect light.

>> No.14238036

>>14237971
Sadly no, nor did I get to read any replies to my Garde de la donna vs "roof" stance-conundrum.

>> No.14238042

>>14238003
Ah that makes sense I suppose
I was almost expecting something along the lines of the japanese two person sword.

>> No.14238058

I'd go for something with a little bit of flair, but nothing crazy. Maybe some runes carved down the side of the blade or something like that.

Crazy anime style weapons irritate me.

>> No.14238069

Something simple, but nice looking. Like, if it's magic, I don't need spikes everywhere, but some nice runes or something engraved on it or a gilded crossguard and pommel are fine.

>> No.14238076

I think the center sword in OP's picture is about as flashy as swords should become.

The two on the right are just serious clusterfucks for swords, but I think you could pull them off as either ceremonial swords or some kind of magic sword where the magic part is quite a bit more important than the sword part.

>> No.14238081

>>14238036
yeah, thread seemed to die overnight. shame.

erm, rough and short of it, depends on how complex you'd like, of course, for a greatsword. assuming a blunt, similar to the landschnecht style zweihanders which you pictured in that thread, my approximate quote was around £450 for a relatively simple straight-bladed greatsword with ring-hilt, and conventional hilt detailing, and going upward from there, up to about £650 for one with parrying flukes and leather-bound ricasso, and up to £800 or so for one with a flamboyant blade and engraved pommel and cross detailing.

that would of course be dependant on if you're looking for an exact replica of an original, a general type copy, or a rebated one for sparring - sparring ones, I'd likely drop a little on the prices.

pic is the detail of a 1520's flamboyant with tassel...

>> No.14238101

>>14238081
Awesome, I'd order right away if I wasn't pennyless.
Let me get back to you when I have my life in order, heh

>> No.14238119

>>14237945
>>14238003
The larger swords displayed supposedly belonged to Pier Gerlofs Donia, which makes it's wielder as abnormal in size as the sword.

>> No.14238138

Unique or plain isn't exactly a dichotomy. Unique or mass produced? Flashy or plain? Your standard arming sword (the design was stable for a long time, although I don't think it hung around as long as the katana) might be the only one made of meteorite ore.

Incidentally, I like straight swords that can be used one handed and controlled with the wrist, but that feel more solid than a rapier. I don't much like spikes, grooves or large elaborate guards, but I do like unusual metal, gems and engravings.

I like Exalted, but I think Daiklaves are probably going it. It's not the length of a Daiklave that puts me off (4 foot long 1h sword? OK), it's the width (four inch wide, inch thick blade? why?). Incidentally, those are the measurements for a Reaper Daiklave, the rapier-equivalent sword. The other types of Daiklave are much larger.

>> No.14238270

u not like fancy blades?

>> No.14238281

viking one-edged sword
fuck yeah

>> No.14238296

Something REALISTIC.

Mankind has produced marvellous works of art, designed to kill.

Unlike the faggot shit we nowadays pass as "legendary weapons" in fantasy.

>> No.14238300

>>14238281
I will never be able to afford a sword like that.

>> No.14238334

>>14238296
"realistic" how much game time of your RPGs is realistic?--sounds like a boring group to me. that's what it's called "fantasy" and "magic"

>> No.14238376

Unique.

Unless your idea of "Unique" is "Holy shit this is fucking stupid". Because in that case, I'll take "Plain".

>> No.14238396

>>14238281
Oh my god that is a sexy blade.

>> No.14238398

>>14238281
>>14238281
Oh that is beautiful

>> No.14238409

>>14237930

I was thinking for a top down RPG set in antiquity it would be neat to have more fighting style choice than just "two handed, dual wield, and tank". Was thinking you'd have three to four shield and sidearm fighting styles.

>>"Barbarian" 1 handed and shield with a focus on swinging offensive damage.
>>"Hoplite/Legionary" - Middle of the road to offense/defense
>>"Shield-Wall" - focus on defense.

That way you could have a one hander who can DPS, albeit not as well as a two hander but with greater protection.

And I like elegant realistic weaponry with a smooth streamlined look usually - spatha and gladius, forward swept blade (Khopesh, falcata, machiara, ect)

>> No.14238435

>>14238334
Stop being an ignorant cockshit who doesn't know a thing about military and art history.

Look at that Horseman's Pick. Isn't it beautiful?

>> No.14238438

Whichever one looks better to my eye.

>> No.14238445

>>14238281
mm. Victor Cervenka does make some good stuff.

what's most impressive is, that's not actually pattern-welded - the owner hand-painted resist onto the blade and ecid-etched it to get the fake pattern-welding on it.

which is impressively batshit insane.

this is pretty, too, by Peter Johnnson.

>> No.14238457

>>14238409
That would sound interesting, but you're using entirely too much WoW bullshit terminology for my liking

>> No.14238469

>>14238334
Your "fantastic magic" swords only look "fantastic and magical" because the artist in question can't draw medieval weapons for shit.

He can't draw a decent sword, so he resorts to gaudy colours, and many silly spikes.

That's not imagination, that's not magical. That's a shitty artist.

>> No.14238470

Depends on the RPG.

Some places it's better to look common.

>> No.14238475

>>14238457

My apologies bud. Certainly not a wow-fag, I quit raiding back when the highest raid was that that fiery place with Ragnaros (before he got legs). I was thinking of it more in the context of Dragon age and the usual breakdown of Roleplaying games with parties.

Having been researching the Middle East Circa 7th century BC prior to picking up DA2, my new game I'll never get would be a plot-strong top down party RPG set in antiquity.

And it wouldn't hurt to get chariots and horses, for once. I feel like RPG developers (Pen and paper and digital) have an unnatural hatred of spears and mounts.

>> No.14238476

>> No.14238490

weapon dump?

>> No.14238493

>>14238435
Quit dicking your historical wargames into my awesome gaudy fantasy fiction.

>> No.14238508

>>14238493
>awesome gaudy fantasy fiction

>bunch of worthless deviantart hacks copying fantasy fiction/art giants

Anyone can draw mediocre shit with practice, a tablet and photoshop.

>> No.14238544

>>14238409
Why? What you're feeling now, "I'm enjoying knowing a lot about different styles of weapons", isn't best conveyed with weapon selection. You can throw the occasional interesting bit of trivia into a game of DnD you're running, but trying to build that into an RPG system is first, likely to complicate combat which needs to be fast to be entertaining, and second, only going to come up in character creation when players choose their PCs' weapons.

I'm imagining a table full of stats for historically accurate weapons. I'm also imagining that most players would scan the table for the sword with the most damage/defense/whatever and choose that, ignoring everything else. That's probably not what you want.

>> No.14238554

>>14238475
Wait just one moment... Ragnaros got legs?

>> No.14238556

>>14238469
>so he resorts to gaudy colours, and many silly spikes.


the spikes are silly, but technically, colour is'nt ahistorical.

if you can get it right, it is theoretically possible to get a properly tempered, hardened steel blade to be naturally coloured a bright, vivid peacock blue.

the only problem with doing this is, you need to heat the entire blade evenly to within about 3 or 4 degrees C - 5 degrees too hot, it goes pale blue, 5 degrees too cold and its a vivid purple.

plus gilding was common. illustration of that from Meyer:

>> No.14238574

While I can't deny the coolness factor of a flaming glowing rainbow katana, I'd still prefer something discrete and practical, like a set of steel knuckles.

With obsidian spikes.

>> No.14238581

FISTHAMMER

>> No.14238583

>>14238556
Neat. I thought that element of A Song of Ice and Fire was completely made up; apparently it was only mostly made up (unless they can also do black and red). Got any pictures of that? GISing the obvious doesn't seem to work.

>> No.14238590

>>14238581
Dangerously dorfy.

>> No.14238599

>>14238556
With gaudy colours, I wasn't talking about coloured weapons. I know they were capable of colouring weapons, even blackening weapons for stealth, that jazz.

No, I'm talking about weapons glowing more than a Japanese nuclear power plant. The WoWification of fantasy.

"If you chuck some more neon light at it, it will look magical!"

>> No.14238600

>>14238556
AND MINE ENEMIES SHALL REGARD MY MAJESTY FROM A GREAT DISTANCE, AND MY APPROACH SHALL CAUSE THEM TO FILL THEIR PANTALOONS.

>> No.14238608

I would like to ask, if your character favors exotic weapons like double helicopter blades with chainsaws on each end or some such, how do you make one that's discrete?

>> No.14238613

>> No.14238617

>>14238583
blue is easy, black's trickier, but no-where near impossible.

red is'nt easy to do though, and I dont think green is possible.

the rest though is fine.

>> No.14238622

It really depends a lot on the scenario, setting and my role in it.
For example, if I were an Assassin in pretty much any setting I would not want a dagger that flashes bright with the light of a thousand stars or burns with a flame purer than any other because they'd just give my position away, likewise I'd not want any superfluous spikes as they'd make sheathing and drawing any weapon a pain in the arse.

Now, on the flipside of that, if I were some power armoured holy supersoldier in gleaming armour, I would not want my image to be betrayed by a dull rusty maul when I could have a golden two handed warhammer around which's head dance fierce bolts of electricity.

Extreme examples, but I think the point is valid. Most of the time I'd want something subtle but with enough distinction to say "I will fuck you up, this is yor only chance to run."

>> No.14238633

>> No.14238639

I think I'd rather go for one of the following: something that's mostly plain but has noticeable embellishments that don't get in the way, like gilt designs or gems inlaid on in, or something that openly defies physics in a relatively understated way, like having a detached pommel that acts like it's connected or something. If it's magic and we don't gotta explain shit, we might as well have some unexplainable shit to not have to explain.

Or maybe a bit of both.

>> No.14238643

Anything more than runes on the blade and stylized hilt is right out.

Definitely plain for me.

>> No.14238656

If I had to go with an enchanted weapon that looks unique, I would also want it to clearly say "YOU SHOULD RUN. NOW."

Actually, the weapon I was thinking of is a goddamn MOBILE FORTRESS.

>> No.14238666

it really depends on what it looks like
i'm fine with plain
but i'm also willing to use something unique if it matches the outfit better

>> No.14238678

>>14238639
Blade invisible to all but the wielder.

>> No.14238681

>>14238656
like a bardiche?¨or a dane axe?

>> No.14238690

>>14237967

>> No.14238708

>>14238666
Your a bard, aren't you?

>> No.14238714

>>14238656
> DAT ESCAPE VELOCITY
>>14238656

>> No.14238719

>>14238708
generally

>> No.14238760

>> No.14238799

Well it is tecnicaly a weapon...

>> No.14238863

>>14238599
It's not just WoW that does that. I really don't like cheesy light effects on weapons in games. Morrowind did it. Torchlight does it with any weapon with an elemental enchantment (what's the point to the unique models if you're going to throw a load of particle effects over it?)

That sword should have been really cool. Look at it; it's a nice shape, it's got a minion design on the crossguard, it's got engravings. All of that got modelled in game. Unfortunately, it also got a permanent near-opaque blue glow that triples its width. In art, it's very nice looking. In game, it looks like a foam bat. I was so disappointed.

>> No.14238867

>>14238863
I'd like to blame captcha for that, but honestly I just forgot my picture.

>> No.14238871

>> No.14238893

If I were to color my sword in any way before going into battle, I would do it with poop.

Enjoy your poopwound.

>> No.14238894

falcata, anyone?

>> No.14238911

>>14238893

You face off with the poop-golem.

Roll for initiative.

>> No.14238951

Whichever is better for killing.
The most beautiful sword is the one that kills best.

>> No.14238959

>>14238893
>>14238911

>> No.14238960

>>14238951
Actually, the most beautiful sword is the one that steals the souls and enslaves the minds of your foes, turning them into your loyal minions and not actually killing them.

But hey, killing is pretty good too.

>> No.14238961

I go for something that looks unique in a plain way. Unique doesn't mean rainbow spazz attack.

>> No.14238990

>>14238911
Well shit
This will go down the crapper real quick

>> No.14239042

something with a plain blade (no notches, serrations or spikes) but with a nice hilt/pommel.

>> No.14239070

>>14238990
I shit you not!

>> No.14239097

Plain if any weapon other than a bow or rapier.

If either of them, Id want some unique fancyness at least - gold filigree in the bow handle, or a particularly fancy basket on the rapier.
Just because bows are beautiful in their simplicity, and rapiers are beautiful in their....beautifullness.

>> No.14239101

>>14238281
IT'S AARHUS.
TWO A'S
THE WORD WOULD MEAN "HOUSE OF SCARS" IF THERE WERE ONLY ONE A.
THOUGH I SUPPOSE THAT WOULD BE PRETTY COOL.

>> No.14239867

>>14239101
dont blame me, I merely saved the picture. blame the guy who named it
besides, you need two R's for it to be the house of scars

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action