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

If you can see this message, the SSL certificate expiration has been fixed.
Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 21 KB, 289x400, cleric (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
36775522 No.36775522 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

So where does this tradition come from of clerics and paladins and the holy warrior milieu using maces come from?

This may date before tabletops but if anyone on 4chan knows it's you guys.

>> No.36775543

I think it has something to do with clerics not being allowed to spill blood, so they used a blunt weapon instead.

Don't quote me on that though.

>> No.36775559
File: 453 KB, 1000x733, DrudgeSkeletons.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
36775559

they deal full damage to skeletons

>> No.36775590

>>36775522
OD&D is my oldest source:
Clerics were forbidden from spilling blood because Gygax gave them arbitrary religious vows. So they just bludgeoned shit to death, lacerations be damned.

What I want to know is why skeletons use scimitars.

>> No.36775599
File: 43 KB, 517x310, MEDmace.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
36775599

>>36775543
That's a popular myth but a myth nonetheless

>The evidence for this is sparse and appears to derive almost entirely from the depiction of Bishop Odo of Bayeux wielding a club-like mace at the Battle of Hastings in the Bayeux Tapestry, the idea being that he did so to avoid either shedding blood or bearing the arms of war. The fact that his brother Duke William carries a similar item suggests that, in this context, the mace may have been simply a symbol of authority. Certainly, other Bishops were depicted bearing the arms of a knight without comment, such as Archbishop Turpin who bears both a spear and a sword named "Almace" in The Song of Roland or Bishop Adhemar of Le Puy, who also appears to have fought as a knight during the First Crusade, an expedition that Odo also joined.

>> No.36775602

>>36775590
Because Scimitar and Skeleton both start with S, duh.

>> No.36775634

Another example example of this popular myth is Age of Empire.
It had text about some units one of them talked about the sine effusione sanguinis which said it didn't alllow blood to be spilt.
>>36775599
Probably right with his 1 to 1 copypaste.

>> No.36775639

>>36775522
It's the "do not spill blood thing" indeed. It all stems from a single famous image, the Bishop Odo at the battle of Hastings on the Bayeoux Tapestry, that reinforced this stereotype. In reality, it's a myth: clergy and holy men either avoided fighting, or they used weapons just as any other warriors, but the concept kinda sticked.
It's also further reinforced by the image of a clergy associated with certain holy items, including the religious scepters.

>> No.36775644

>>36775590
Ray Harryhausen.

>> No.36775675

>>36775599
there was possibly a balance component as well

maces were traditionally an inferior weapon (in D&D) and clerics were supposed to be middling warriors.

>> No.36775700

>>36775559
what if its a slashing mace

wait that would just be a sword

oh sword enchanted to look like a mace

>> No.36775711

>>36775675
also im pretty sure even in basic they were meant to be undead killers you need bludgening weapons to kill skelengtons

>> No.36775787
File: 59 KB, 130x450, Ceremonialmace.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
36775787

>>36775522

>"The ceremonial mace is a highly ornamented staff of metal or wood, carried before a sovereign or other high official in civic ceremonies by a mace-bearer, intended to represent the official's authority."
>"When the mace was still in actual use as a weapon, it was deemed fit for close-protection, and hence a mace-bearer could be a bodyguard."
>"As for ceremonial maces, which symbolize the power or status of a Monarch"
>"A monarch is the sovereign head of state,[1] officially outranking all other individuals in the realm.[2] A monarch may exercise the most and highest authority in the state or others may wield that power on behalf of the monarch. "

Basically Clerics and Paladins served a Deity, not a King. Deities hold power over Kings, making them Monarchs. In order to serve (peacefully) for their Deities, they were entrusted power and authority. Seen fit for protection, a mace would have offered protection but also alternative options of combat, such as breaking an arm or leg rather than severing it. Additionally you could fatigue someone, rather than straight up kill them.

Pic related. Certain Ceremonial Maces could also be filled with Holy Water; Called an Aspergillum, which was used to cleanse evil from both people and places.

>> No.36775819

>>36775522
>So where does this tradition come from of clerics and paladins and the holy warrior milieu using maces come from?
In comparison to slashing/piercing weapons, bludgeoning ones have reduced lethality. Sure, one can argue that not every slash ends with kill and it's extra easy to kill with a mace, but at least in theory, maces and similar weapons allow the wielder to stop the enemy by the means of KO - preferable solution for someone who doesn't aim at leaving big pile of corpses behind.

Where it came from? The past + D&D authors.

My personal opinion is that while there were much earlier examples of people wielding maces, the most direct influence was Pyle's rendition of Robin Hood and his merry forest band.

They used maces and staves first, leaving swords for special encounters...

>> No.36775820

>>36775543
>>36775599

Even if that myth was wrong it is the most likely reason for clerics being forbidden blade weapons in D&D.

Just like the reason D&D introduced "Studded leather" armour which makes no sense is that someone saw a brigandine armour and didn't know what it it. You see, Studded leather is described to be a soft leather (or cloth) suit with a huge amount of studs on it and the studs are supposed to be the protection. This makes no sense and would not work, but... A brigandine looks like that on top while underneath all those studs are keeping in place the small metal plates that actually provide the protection.

>> No.36775843

i like the whole archetype of paladins wielding hammers

i read a story on tg like a few years ago about a little boy asking a paladin why he used a hammer and not a sword and the paladin said you cant build a school with a sword

does anyone have that screencap?

>> No.36775862

>>36775820
I know right? I have no idea where game designers get their ideas, but it sure isn't reality.

Building on the myth of clerics exclusively using bludgeoning weapons, cleric-specific enemies in games are all vulnerable to bludgeoning and resistant to other damage. It's now an entrenched tradition in the genre.

>> No.36775877

>>36775787
>>36775819
>Seen fit for protection, a mace would have offered protection but also alternative options of combat, such as breaking an arm or leg rather than severing it. Additionally you could fatigue someone, rather than straight up kill them.

while i'm pretty sure the actual logic was >>36775599, this actually kind of makes sense. it wouldn't make sense IRL (because maces are pretty brutal), but since D&D clerics can heal at all levels, while restoring limbs is a higher level trick, then it makes sense to use a mace if you want to avoid permanent damage.

>> No.36775935

>>36775862
>I know right? I have no idea where game designers get their ideas, but it sure isn't reality.

It is easier to excuse the early mistakes since information was less easily available (though books and libraries were a thing already, research wasn't as easy as now.)

Besides, I can ignore unhistorical things in fantasy particularly since the "no blade weapons" ban is perfectly reasonable cultural thing in an alternate world and they may have whatever justifications.

(But the studded armour is annoying when they could have had something like leather lamellar armour be the more flexible/better leather armour.)

>> No.36775937

>>36775543
Son, if you honestly think a mace or other blunt weapon wouldn't spill blood then I got news for you.

>> No.36775946

>>36775937
It's a popular misconception, nothing else.

>> No.36775958

>>36775935
>Besides, I can ignore unhistorical things in fantasy particularly since the "no blade weapons" ban is perfectly reasonable cultural thing in an alternate world and they may have whatever justifications.

this is true when clerics are not-christians, but once you establish that clerics belong to a metric fucktonne of different religions it would be very odd if all of them disapprove of bladed weapons.

>> No.36775963
File: 306 KB, 1240x1176, 1403858742299.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
36775963

>>36775843
Something like this? Third post in the screencap

>> No.36776016

>>36775937
>>36775946
Actually, it isn't.

Mace has smaller chance to spill blood, (and I mean "fuck, the guy was leaking like a hundred years old rusty pipe" when I', saying "spilled blood"), ESPECIALLY if you're fighting armored enemy.

Sure, there will be blood.

Sure, you can hit him so hard, that his skull breaks, sure there might be massive internal hemorrhaging, but it doesn't change the fact that good percentage of encounters should end with the enemy being "simply" beaten rather than chopped to bits.

And I remind about armored enemy scenario once again.

>> No.36776022

>>36775644
Enlightening.

>> No.36776032

>>36775958
War domain allowed a 3.5 cleric to wield their deities' weapons giving them both martial weapon proficiency and weapon focus (deity's favoured weapon).

>> No.36776059

>>36776016
The idea that "clergymen carried maces into battles because they weren't allowed to spill blood" is a myth. Both in the side that maces don't spill blood (though, probably less than swords, nobody is denying that) or in the side of clergymen using maces exclusively.

>> No.36776075

>>36775958
Fantasy world. Maybe it really is a custom for all/most of the gods to order their servants to carry maces and hammers. Stranger things happen in fantasy.
>>36776016
Opponent is in a late medieval armour. Hit him with a mace and the spiky bits will penetrate and the mace can dent his helmet and kill him but there is not that much blood spilled. Maybe no blood at all.

It would be a different matter if the opponent is some poor peasant without an armour but still much less blood than if you had been using a sword to gut the bastard.

>> No.36776085

>>36776059
>"clergymen carried maces into battles because they weren't allowed to spill blood"
I wasn't referring to that at all.

I'm talking about the fact that bludgeoning weapons have lesser chance of bleeding the other guy dry than edged/pointy ones.

Nothing else.

>>36776075
>Hit him with a mace and the spiky bits
While it's certain that such weapons exist and were used, I wouldn't count that as bludgeoning weapon at all.

Damn, we're approaching sorites paradox here...

>> No.36776098

>>36775522
Mounted Crusaders used Lances on horseback, and either a longsword or mace when they dismounted.

Maces are better at crumpling Armor, but are somewhat more 'merciful' on flesh.

>> No.36779014

>>36775590
Not arbitrary. He got it from some medieval dude called Bishop odo. Google it.

>> No.36780285

>>36775787
>mace
>fatigue and not kill
NOOOOOOOOOPE.

>> No.36780311

>>36775522
My cleric always uses hammers or axes, i don't know what you're talking about

>> No.36780960

>>36775522
My understanding was that maces were policing weapons, utilized rather often because while they do cause damage and pain, they are less lethal than pointed or bladed weapons.

>> No.36781043
File: 215 KB, 800x600, 1395503366585.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
36781043

>>36780960
If we look at town guards around the 15th-16th century I've gotten the impression that they liked things like two handed swords, large flails, etc. The idea that police should tone down the lethality may be a bit more modern.

And either way, while a mace might be somewhat less lethal than a sword, it's probably still a bit too lethal for use if you want to somewhat reliably take people alive. It's probably when we remove the head and get a truncheon that the lethality drops significantly.

>> No.36781190
File: 8 KB, 360x360, tumblr_mbaxm9zO4W1qhvucpo1_1349241801_cover[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
36781190

>>36775602
Spooky Scary Skeleton Scimitars Send Slashes down your Spine

>> No.36781578

>>36775522
The reason why it's a wide-spread idea, is that it was included in early D&D and was said to be because holy men etc couldn't spill blood so they used blunt weapons. It was claimed to have some historical precedent, but the current theory is that the mace was just a symbol of authority, and there are similar depictions where kings or similar wield a mace, and where priests or bishops wield swords.

It's basically a made up reason to promote different classes not using the same gear.

>> No.36781591

>>36779014
Google it yourself. Odo was depicted as wielding a mace, there are other religious officials who were depicted wielding swords.

>> No.36781610

>>36781190
thank mr skeltal

>> No.36781722
File: 10 KB, 356x221, Mace.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
36781722

>>36780960
Just think about that for a second.
Something made to hurt people wearing armour is not going to be "less lethal" against people without armour. That's videogame logic.

Sure, a simple club or staff is less lethal than a sword, but a war mace was made to break the bones of people in mail or later, like the iconic flanged mace, to make holes in plate armour. They were plenty lethal, so there's absolutely no logic in using them as some sort of safety measure. Giving town guards staves or clubs makes sense, but maces not so much. For all the same reasons the whole "vow not to spill blood, use a mace" is nonsense. There'e plenty of blood when you break someones face or cave his head in.

>> No.36781742

>>36781722
in fairness, clerics can heal. they have a loose definition of non-lethal.

>> No.36781865

>>36781742
>We stand by the court ruling that the violence used in the death of X was in fact, non-lethal and not excessive. The absence of a cleric on the scene was a tragic, unforeseeable circumstance.

#Justice for Throngor.

>> No.36782116

Studded leather is a myth? What could be the mid-tier light armor between leather and hide, then?

>> No.36784640

>>36782116
Quilted bodkins.

>> No.36785939

>>36781865
Ok, I lol'd

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