|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 12:53 pm
I want to look into the different kinds of swords there are out there and to get descriptions of them so that people will be able to correctly visualise the kind of blade I am talking about.
These are scimitars - Scimitar 1, Scimitar 2
But so are Drizzt's blades, Icingdeath and Twinkle - Icingdeath & Twinkle.
There are different types of scimitars, so how would you go about describing what they look like in writing? My pirate uses scimitars like the ones shown in the pictures scimitar 1 and 2, but the hilts are more decorative. The blades are pretty much the same as in those two pictures though, and they are NOTHING like Drizzt's.
Note that this thread is about discussing swords and how to describe them as well as the history behind them.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 7:56 pm
Twinkle and Icingdeath were really just the artists who draw Drizzt getting it wrong, more than anything. The mistake has been perpetuated by the maker of that set. By definition, a scimitar has a curved blade and I'm fairly certain Salvatore described them that way. There's a rendering of Drizzt from the cover of one of the "Realms of..." short story compilations that gets them right.
Who names their sword "Twinkle" anyway? Doesn't exactly strike fear into the heart of an enemy...
There are usually a million different sub-types to every type of sword. I could go on at length about the different types of rapier there are, for example (mmmmm... Papenheimer...). And describing them to the layman is never easy without falling into the trap of using the terminology they wouldn't know. I tend to find that a fairly basic description of the weapon is good enough to get the idea of what it looks like across to the reader. Highlight the important parts like dwarven runes along the blade and a magical gem set in the crosspiece.
Incidentally, some of the most famous swords in literature never got a lick of description. Beowulf's sword, Hrunting, was never more than "a sword." And then there is the mysterious Vorpal sword from Lewis Carroll's Jabberwocky.
A character's style of fighting can suggest a type of sword, sometimes. There are certain weapons that lend themselves to thrusting rather than cutting and vice versa. I wouldn't want to give Conan the Barbarian an epée, for instance, or Errol Flynn a broadsword. It would just look ridiculous.
Berz.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:28 pm
You know, I'm not exactly sure how to describe a sword but I would imagine that I would start from the blade most times. I did describe a blade on one of my stories but it's been removed from my account on FF.net.
Did you know that in Aria of Sorrow you can find a "Hrunting" sword? I think SotN had a Vorpal blade in it somewhere. 3nodding
Berz is right about a character's style having to do greatly with the type of sword he/she wields. I can't picture Errol Flynn with an axe or a huge war-hammer. mrgreen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:49 am
The two artists you say, Berz? Is there such a person in the world called Icingdeath? I thought they were the names of the swords themselves, but I know what you mean by those particular artists getting the shape of the swords wrong.
In truth, the pictures I posted are of scimitars though aren't they?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:08 pm
Whoops! Sorry, I can see how that was worded badly. My fault. That should have been "The case of Twinkle and Icingdeath was really just the artists who draw Drizzt getting it wrong."
No, Twinkle and Icingdeath are, most certainly, Drizzt's scimitars. What I mean to say was that the artist who drew the picture that the sword maker was working off of drew them rather badly and clearly didn't know what a scimitar was. Other artists have drawn them much better. The sword-maker just made an unfortunate choice when it came time to make the "replicas."
I honestly wouldn't really call the replicas scimitars. They're incredibly straight-bladed for scimitars. They have a teeny-tiny curve to them right at the very end of the foible, but that's really about it. And it's only curved for a given value of "curved," really. Just enough to make it an academic quibble. I mean, katana have more curve than that! In fact, the one in the picture underneath them do, too.
It really just looks like some company who makes nothing but straight blades had a meeting and said "quick! What marketing tie-in can we do? Forgotten Realms has a character that has tons of fans, right? Doesn't he have some pretty famous swords? What do you mean 'scimitars?' We can't do curved blades! All right, we'll make 'em with what we have on hand and hope no one knows any better! Yeah! That always works with the clueless fanboy set!"
Berz.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:17 pm
I'd just wondered if they were different kinds, but evidently as you say, it was a mistake on the replicas.
Though again I ask... smile the pictures I posted ARE of scimitars yes'm?
The links "scimitar 1" and "scimitar 2". They're pretty much the same blade, just that one is a photo and the other is drawn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:42 pm
By definition, a scimitar has a curved blade. Those other two pictures are definitely scimitars, yes.
Berz.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:31 pm
I'm glad Berz managed to answer Mel's question. I remember a card in Magic the Gathering called "Dancing Scimitar" and the art was very much like those posted by Mel on her first post.
Say, can we discuss about any kind of sword here? I mean, blades are not off limits, are they? neutral
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 10:10 pm
As far as I'm concerned, the more swords, the better.
mrgreen
Berz.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:33 am
One thing that bothers me is the prevailence of dual-wielded swords in fantasy. Sure, it might look cool, but it's not very practical.
Real warriors throughout history rarely wielded two blades of equal size. Some knights would fight with an arming sword (one-handed sword) and a dagger or short sword. Many other warriors used other dual weapons (dual bearded axes is a nice combo against opponents with shields). But few ever used two full-sized swords (although some carried a spare sword, to be sure).
When you wield two full swords, they will simply get in each other's way, slowing each other down. Dual swords are very poor for defense against thrusting attacks-- attacks made by weapons such as spears, longswords, and the like-- and useless for defense against arrows (don't give me crap about cutting them out of the air, just think about how much easier a shield would be).
Historical warriors consistently preferred to carry a shield in their second hand or just go all out for a two-handed weapon. Alternatively, a shorter blade in their second hand did allow a bit more variability but didn't get in the way of the primary blade or slow the warrior down.
And don't even get me started on how the use of longswords is portrayed. Fantasy would be better off with a bit more realism regarding medieval weapons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:54 pm
As for describing swords, a good description is not long and drawn out, including all five senses, as some might suggest. (Not many are going to want to sniff or lick a blade, but they might notice the rush of a swipe through the air reach their ears.) The reader doesn't need to know every tiny detail of a blade that will only be swung out for use at rare times. The weight of a good description is measured by what accounting the most noticeable features of the weapon.
I agree most wholly with Berz on this. Stick with a fair description: runes, gems, or other decorative touches that would instantly catch someone's eye if they were witnessing the sword being drawn. Anything more would bog the reader down and get boring. This is most important in first-person, or third person-limited, but really in any format. Ask yourself what would this character be impressed with? and then get back to the story. Character is most important in those situations.
Also, I want to point out that there is a difference between a scimitar and a falchion. There is not a huge noticeable contrast, as is between sword and axe to provide an example, but there is enough of one to note. It's only a point of interest, though. Some might disagree, and I'll accept that (though for the simple sake of arguing I might put up a dispute; just a warning).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 2:10 pm
you allways forget a sword is a very dangerous wepond dont you? you see a lot of them on display now days and thoses arnt shape. then you hear on the news that a murder has just happen and the wepond...is that long japan sword that was used about samira - sorry the name has excape form me for some reason sweatdrop .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
