What in the chicken fried fuck is up with this article?
It scales primarily with Strength and Dexterity and is a good Weapon for high-dexterity characters who can excel at slashing attacks while spinning. A curved sword with a thin blade of ample length. Light of weight despite its larger size, its slicing attacks come in rapid succession. Such sabers were renowned for their sharpness and lethality.
Bro. This isn’t D&D. This HAS to be leakage from chat GPT. Sabers (and I think we can safely consider a shamshir in the class of saber, based on its curve and hilt design) were primarily designed for fighting on horseback or camel back. Thats the whole point of the curved design, so that your sword can slice/ slide across an opponent, and not get stuck/ entangled while doing so. Its also what explains their reach/ length.
Fr. I paused to check if I was on fextralife or something.
I had to watch some ScholarGladiatoria after reading this to feel clean again.
I’ve been under the impression that articles were written by someone whose first language isn’t English and isn’t a trained scholar, so I was giving them a bit of slack.
Do you guys have some better sources (specifically for archeology) that tread the line between overly academic and more accessible better? I’m not in the field, I just follow the RSS feed for this site, so I’m open to recs.
Bro the article is sitting dexterity and strength like they attributes in a larp game.
here is a good source on historical arms and combat: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KpBLUj1uTgo&pp=ygURc2Nob2xhZ2xhZGlhdG9yaWE%3D
Bro the article is sitting dexterity and strength like they attributes in a larp game. They’re literally confusing fiction and reality.
here is a good source on historical arms and combat: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SAvM3rQInJg
You see those warriors from Hammerfell? They’ve got curved swords. Curved. Swords.
