📲 Install Raid now ➡pl.go-ga.me/bhx8atyy and get an amazing in game-loot and a special starter pack with an Epic champion Vergis and Rector Drath upon reaching level 25! 🔥 🍀New users can get Legendary Sun Wukong through promocode MONKEYKING available for new players by January 7th 🧑🎄Play the Xmas Minigame ➡ xmas.raidrpg.com for a chance to win a $5000 gift card, Gaming console, Smartphone, $100 Amazon card or in-game loot! 📱 Link to enter Raid Shadow Legends codes (1 in 24 hours) ➡ plarium.com/en/redeem/raid-shadow-legends/
No mention of Brigandine. A think coat, or gambeson let alone brigandine does not impair mobility while not a fraction as taking on breath as full plate harness. maille really depends on how well it is made to sit on the waist & shoulders. If you are are older or smaller then Brigandine is your best choice in my opinion as due to my failed health with 1/2 my ling capacity I would never choose to wear plate harness.
Regarding sling stones against armor. Spanish records about fighting the tribes in the new world recount how obsidian tipped weapons like arrows and darts were utterly useless against their metal plates, and they also described how the sling stones REALLY hurt even through armor. So there's that.
But the Spanish themselves used weapons that were useless against armor. Not that that doesn’t mean it isn’t still an extreme advantage to them. Also take in mind that the “darts” are about the length of a man, supposedly. Of course some projectiles would hit them on unarmed spots.
@triumphant39 Yes yes, I'm aware. Just talking specifically about the slings since it's what Matt talked about in the video. If they "really hurt" when they struck your armor, no doubt in my mind they can mame or kill you with a square hit in an unarmored part.
@@Glimmlampe1982 frankly the clay projectiles used more for consistent weight,i doubt it would shatter against whatever armor the local use (which definitely what those clay projectile originaly meant to use against)
@@leobuana7430depends what armor they used, hide armor, no, wood armor yes But I wasnt thinking those clay projectiles were designed as shrapnel, but they worked as shrapnel against metal armor.
About slings: up to 5% of Youth baseball injuries are fractures caused by baseballs. A baseball is a lot softer than a rock. A baseball also does not concentrate force nearly as well. A rock from a sling also moves much faster than the fastest baseballs, 225-240 km per hour. Baseball pitchers are _not even trying_ to fracture bones
Yes and being a range weapon, the hero can perhaps be using the local geography to slow the enemy enough to get multiple shots. Thus perhaps the leader of the group can be taken out along with someone else who is near the back
Find a video of a Balearic slinging contest. The guys are slinging tennis balls at targets, but the action is similar to a baseball pitcher, - with a 50cm extension on his forearm. Close range slinging is very similar to a baseball pitch. Now consider the projectile. The Greek writers describe their mercenary slingers using lead bullets, whilst amateurs and middle eastern barbarians sling rocks. I've seen bullets (Museum at the knight's palace - Rhodes). About the size of a thumb bone and shaped like an american football. An ideal rock would probably be a pebble slightly smaller than a golf ball. Imagine the speeds these light projectiles could be launched at. Imagine the shaped lead bullet spiralling toward a target, too fast and small to see or dodge, and the penetrating injuries. Imagine a bigger pebble and the concussion and fractures it could cause. The Greeks recommended slings against heavily armoured enemies, and their short-bows against unarmoured enemies.
@@kensmith5694 If they knew the area, they could sling over a hill and strike targets on the road behind out of retaliation (or chasing) range. Plus any follow up about "bandits on the road", so they search travellers, only finding belts and string but no bows or swords... some stealth advantages there with a weapon you can disassemble easily and scavenge the ammo from local stones.
A 200g rock thrown at 150km/h has about 170 Joules of energy. A couple of joules already sting so I expect this amount of power to break bones. Espacially because rocks are pretty hard and should transfer almost 100% of their energy.
When my daughter was three she snuck up on me and pulled my skeen dubh out of my kilt hose without the sheath and tried to run off with it. She was laughing kind of maniacally when she did it.
Kids also have adult level grip strength. Our primate ancestors had their babies cling into their mother's back just about 24/7. That gorilla grip hasn't quite left us
The spear concept was also demonstrated again in"Seven Samurai". The heroic ronin, after getting to the village, start forming the villagers into groups and outfit them with bamboo spears; as such, by the end, they have some effectiveness against the bandits (like when the town coward skewers a guy by himself)
As Matt was talking about this, I was thinking the same thing, but also thought about how the writers missed the opportunity to use this tactic in Walking Dead. Just a handful of people with spears would be extremely effective in that sort of fantasy world. The zombies are slow and don't try to parry or dodge, etc.
@@roentgen571 well, they did, back when they took The Prison. STabbing Zeds through the fence. But, yknow, the plot has to move along, so they abandoned spears at the same time they decided against building a farm in their massive prison complex to continue the syndication of the series.
About Slings: If I remember correctly Caeser described how the Celts used slings very effectively - in the sense of completely obliterating faces of Legionnaires when the got hit.
Yes, a practiced person with a sling can be accurate. There is another thing that a sling may allow that some other weapons don't. It is possible to shoot at an angle that is well above 45 degrees so that the shot falls down onto the opposing troops. This forces them to raise their shields exposing the lower part of their body. Someone else can take the shot at the legs. In the extreme case: the same person with the sling may be fast enough to send the second stone at the legs.
Similarly in the conquest of Mesoamerica and southamerica by the spanish, if records by the spainards are the source, it seems the Slings were among the most efective native weapons against them
7:20 Reference Native American/First nation tribes and armor they actually did use it prior to the introduction of firearms through the fur trade. Then, just like was happening in Europe, the armor was abandoned in favor of lighter skirmishing tactics. Prior to that though they had heavy armored warriors and lighter ranged skirmishers just like in Ancient Rome and Greece. Check a channel called Malcom P.L. who has done videos of a reconstruction of pre-Columbian Iroquoian armor (I'll link one below). 13:30 Medical journals from ancient Rome talked about having to remove sling stones that had buried into the flesh and modern reproductions by inexperienced modern slingers have been shown to produce foot pound energy levels equivalent to some lower powered pistol cartridges (think lighter .38 Special target loads if you're familiar with firearms). So they weren't equivalent to a rifle or shotgun but certainly capable of killing a man sized target. As a weapon for smaller people they don't require much strength but aiming it properly is more complex than bows and requires a lot of practice to judge distance and adjust the release point as you're spinning the sling. So, just like a longbowman had to train from a young age to build up the strength, a slinger had to practice from an early age to develop that judgement. For a fictional character it would be unlikely that a nobleman would have spent that kind of time unless they were unorthodox and hung out with a mentor with a peasant/poacher class background. On a general comment about blunt vs sharp weapons, if we're talking about war clubs/hammers the weight would be a legitimate concern but, depending on your setting, blackjack/'lifesavers' (the latter an old English weapon with a small lead weight braided into a short length of rope), nightstick/belaying pins or cudgels like the African knobkerrie and Irish shillelagh were also popular in cities and towns and could be a preferred weapon of a rogue style character. ruclips.net/video/qmkQS8_MODE/видео.html
I think a better analogue than a .38 special is beanbag shotgun rounds which have almost identical size, mass and velocity though beanbag rounds are trying to be "soft", they are in fact filled with lead shot, they aren't very soft in practice. Beanbag rounds can kill but it's less likely, it requires a hit to a very vulnerable and unprotected part of the body like the cranium or sternum. It's one of those things that's "possibly lethal" but not probably-lethal. It's far more likely to just cause painful welts that don't need any medical treatment other than rest. Some very long slings can hurl huge stones larger than a man's fist, these aver much deadlier but you need to be fully grown to hurt such things, this is more like Olympic hammer throw than the shepherd's sling.
@@Treblaine If you're looking for an alternative analogy, bean bag rounds would be a bad choice. More like the old high caliber, low velocity lead balls from black powder flintlock pistols. There's still more than enough velocity to penetrate human flesh and bone. I'll link a video where someone managed to get several inches of penetration in ballistic gelatin using a slung lead "football" (American style) shaped shot. Now this was done at point blank range but by modern slinger who wouldn't have had anywhere near the same training as a traditional slinger would have had. So this is not a child's toy that a lot of people in the HEMA community seem to think it is. ruclips.net/video/aGFCR5oDjKI/видео.html
@@Treblaine Rubber bullets is a much better analogy. these MUST be fired at the ground to bounce into targets to cause severe bruising, breaking small bones. A direct hit can and will cause death from fractures, penetration wounds that rarely exit (much like sling bullets found embedded inside ribs and chest cavities or skulls), and internal damage from blunt force.
@@littlekong7685 "A direct hit can and will cause death from fractures" People are directly hit in the body by bean-bag rounds very frequently yet typically do not die. Sometimes they do but that is NOT the normal outcome for them to even need to go to the hospital. These sling bullets "embedded in ribs" is not enough, it's not particularly debilitating, Theodore Roosevelt famously sustained such an injury when a very low power pistol round was fired at him and after passing through his glasses case only embedded in his ribs. This was such a minor wound that he gave a speech before going to a hospital where the hospital didn't prescribe any treatment other than washing the wound. It healed quickly without complication. You can expect the sling to be lethal if it hits somewhere very vulnerable like the cranium, or if the sling stone is huge, more like an olympic hammer throw.
Naginata is a Japanese polearm very popular among women, also in an historical context. Its use relay more in whole body rotation than in upper body strength. It could be the optimal weapon for a smaller weaker character in a fantasy or even in an historical fiction
The association is almost entirely a culture thing. A less weak person will be able to use the polearm better than the more weak person. Simply put it, unless we go into firearms or projectile weapon that reload with mechanical assistance, the weaker person is doom.
@@jintsuubest9331 I wouldn't say 'doomed', exactly. Of course, size and strength (and sex, because biology, when comparing men v. women) is always an advantage in hand to hand combat. Choosing the right weapon to mitigate (not negate) those disadvantages can go a long way. It's about shrinking that capability gap. Barehanded, a child or a woman, even a small man, is always going to be heavily disadvantaged against large man, right? Give them both knives, though, and the big dude still has the advantage, obviously, but the smaller person is now an actual threat. Put the pointy bit of metal on a long pole, the disparity shrinks a bit more...but yeah, it's still there, of course. The smaller person is simply increasing their chances of survival.
Check the pillow spears too, the short one's with attached rope, as something for the samurai's female family members to keep on hand for self defence if they don't get the time to kit up.
When I was younger I made a sling and would go places and throw rocks with them. I'm definitely not a big strong dude and I don't even play sports where you throw things, so I'm probably a perfect test, and I can get those rocks going terrifyingly fast. I eventually switched to tennis balls when one of the rocks broke in half against a surface and one of the halves came back and went whizzing past me an inch from my throat. I can't even imagine how much power you could get behind a lead bullet with someone that had a real good throwing arm. From what I remember of the historical accounts getting hit by one is no joke. Them's that die'll be the lucky ones.
Pretty sure he must have expressed doubt just to get interaction from everyone who know's he is wrong, but I wouldn't put it past him to just be wrong.
I can understand him underestimating slings a bit but he never touched about the economy of weapons, for an economy if not maintenance of almost none, the price to power(or something) ratio is incomparable. a gun is the only thing higher/better but also at a higher upfront investment and and way higher maintenance.
I also remember a documentary I saw years ago on pygmies. They were hunting elephants...yes, elephants....with what was essentially a partizan. Double edged blade half the length of the weapon. It was very effective. The hunter would hide in the underbrush then pop out and stab the elephant once in the vitals. Overall length appeared to be 5" to 5.5" So essentially if they were fighting an enemy they have reach, cutting power, and the ability to stab. I was quite impressed with their weapons and survival skills.
29:30 Something to consider about armor weight vs person size is that due to the square-cube-law (as an object grows its volume increases faster than its surface) a larger person might actually carry less armor per body weight than a smaller one
@@anaussie213 as person size increases their muscle strength increases with volume while the required armor mass increases with surface area (since the surface area determines how much area needs to be protected) so a large person has less armor weight per muscle strength (This is assuming that a bigger person doesn't necessarily wears thicker armor)
@ armour isn't 2D it's 3D so bigger armour weighs more than the same shaped armour that is smaller, that's the square cube law. It's also why in strength sports the lighter weight classes are stronger p4p than the heavier ones, I mean just look at a 155 pound gymnast doing chin ups and then watch a heavyweight struggle doing them (and that's moving their own bodyweight not even taking into account added weight).
Put the short person on a stool and their sling can be as long as you like... Slings and heavy shot maybe couldn't bypass any meaningful armour or shield - but they were fast, hard to see coming, and any wounds they did inflict could be painful to devastating, especially if they hit the skull. Practically speaking, they take up virtually no space to carry, and even the shot would fit into a compact pouch. I do expect they were used more as volley weapons though.
@@thekaxmax Not true at all, the power comes from spinning fast, someone weak could swing it around fast no problem. Also they can be swung horizontally over the head, so length isn't much of an issue either.
@@kegluneq6306 They don't volley very well because they require significant spaces between shooters. Of course it's possible. But many more archers, javelineers or dartists? can be effective in the same frontage. Not seeing the incoming slingshot is very significant in an age when shields are common. Targets who'd raise their shields to a volley of arrows won't have the same option against slings. My impresison of slings is a handy skirmish weapon, which relies solely on practice and technique.
@steveholmes11 For the volley aspect (i.e. unaimed shots delivered en masse), I'm thinking of both the long ranges that could be achieved that would make placed shots *extremely* impressive, and the possibility that Romans used drilled shot that produced a loud whistling noise for psychological effect. This latter aspect would be emphasised through volume of fire as much as deadliness of aim. I do agree with the space limitations being a factor though, as well as the very high level of skill required to use a sling effectively in the first place.
It also comes with a tactic. Let the large, strong friend be the focus of the enemy's attention, then stab him in the back or side/trip his legs/bonk his knee...
"David and Goliath" was my immediate thought when reading the title. You need _practice_ for attacking individual targets, but I bet they're much more effective against armor than you think they are. That's because of the concussive force of high-velocity stones.
One of my favorite things about depictions of dwarves in fantasy, especially in like Warhammer, is that they often use normal sized shields that are just the same size as them. Also, I'm surprised he didn't mention the billhook, my first blush reaction was spear or similar lighter polearm like the billhook would compensate their reach disadvantage, thrusting can be lethal without a tremendous amount of strength, and a polearm gives you additional leverage if it gives you the option for some type of swinging attack, such as with an edge or a perpendicular spike like a pick.
Small, weak person here, and my money is on the atlatl. I can wallop with one, and it took me little practice (relative to archery) to get a solid but basic proficiency. It’s really all the best boobs of a spear, with the addition of a force multiplier. The darts also being lightweight gives you the ability to carry many more than one could with a heavier, hand-thrown spear.
Good point. Have you tried against armor, and compared it with the results from someone who are bigger and stronger? If you guys were mostly equal in penetration, then I would put my money on you because you'll be a smaller target in a duel.
Especially if the dart has rechangable foreshafts, then you wear the headshafts on a sling on your back, the Atlatl thrower on the belt and you can use whatever kind of dart tip as you like in a smaller quiver in the belt even poisoned tips.
Sling as a projectile weapon (easy to carry doesn't require much strength), primary weapon: naginata (does not require upperbody strength and have great reach), side arm: a sturdy smallsword (very nibble and light at medium range), close up weapon: rondel dagger (excellent at penetrating armor with little force), Armor: chainmail over gambeson + a buckler and a open face helmet. Overall, it is not too much weight since the naginata can be used as a walking stick.
I don't know about these pole weapons, they're extremely vulnerable to someone who is larger and stronger just grabbing it and wrenching it out of your hand. This is a problem you can see with adults who spar in HEMA, it doesn't take much of a size/weight disparity to overcome the leverage advantage because the leverage can be used to work both ways, the length beyond the fulcrum is as far as the other side. Yes, a pole arm is really good if they are deploying arms that try to exploit reach like longswords, but is very vulnerable to grapplers.
The reason naginata were considered a proper weapon for a woman is cultural, not physical. The Japanese understanding of cutting power is derived from leverage which is why the fairly short katana still has a substantial three-hand-long grip or nearly so, for power. Naginata take that and give you more leverage than nodachi or tachi, so you don't 'need' to be physically strong to generate cutting power. The reach advantage is very real, thus 'fit for a woman'; she doesn't need to be strong and she can stay out of arm's reach of the common soldier so her pretty face won't get incidental cuts. In reality, even the smaller naginata blades were as long as katana blades, and the longer ones are shockingly long. As a weapon they're all heavier than a katana and that really wears on your endurance; they are harder to use for a given length of time than a katana. Keeping space with them is paramount to your safety, and that's much harder than keeping a stalemate with a yari. Samurai also used naginata, quite extensively. The cutting power you can make when you have the physique and the leverage is quite awe inspiring.
@cheyannei5983 There were design differences between naginata made for women and men. As time went by, the naginata became more adapted for women, and men stopped using it altogether. A spear is a great weapon, but the naginata has an advantage against multiple opponents since it slashes instead of stabs.
Going beyond one-on-one, the Roman Legions had a whole class of lighter boys/men in light partial armor using throwing weapons and slings to front and flanks and rear of the heavy guys. They no doubt caused Roman opponents trouble enough that it was worth doing.
Yes, although it was a bit out of necessity. Not everyone could afford good armor and a sword. Only grown men who already have some wealth. Younger and poorer boys necessarily had lighter equipment and, as I heard, their possible death was less important to society. There were many children in the past. And the rich father of the family who knew how to work... He shouldn't necessarily run towards larger opponents, throw javelins and try to escape. This is a task for someone young, agile and less important.
@@Zbigniew_Nowak "There were many children in the past" Yes, but child mortality was like 50-75% (ie. in ancient Rome, up to 50% mortality before age 6y, up to 50% of these before hitting adulthood...). So, having 6-8 children was necessary just to prevent population shrinkage. More than 8 for actual population growth.
@@OreoBambino Well, don't convince me that children are important, I wasn't the one who sent my 17-year-old son with a javelin in the front line against the enemies. But a traveler said that many simple peoples still have this approach today. Parents eat first, then children. If the child dies of hunger - it doesn't matter. It's easy to make a new baby, they say. And the father of the family is difficult to replace.
Merry’s sword had stabbed him from behind, shearing through the black mantle and passing up beneath the hauberk had pierced the sinew behind his mighty knee.
i think small but strong characters is an interesting category, dwarves for example, where they lack reach but not strength, making stuff like polearms and spears the most effective melee option.
@@Fatespinner reminds me of dwarf fortress, a popular weapon is silver war hammers due to their weight. based on the sprite of the steam version, they seem to be polearms, so yea lol.
Fantasy dwarves would be interesting. Throwing spears wouldn't work as well for them, because shorter limbs produce less velocity and therefore a weaker throw with less range. However, their short strong limbs would control pole weapons really well. They also wouldn't be as good at cavalry, because they would struggle with large horses. So they would probably have to develop a lot of anti cavalry tactics. I imagine dwarf holds developing something like the Swiss Pikeman. Heavily armoured formation of dwarves with big pikes, just obliterating cavalry and enemy infantry units. With halberd and ax wielding dwarves there to take on armoured infantry. Supported with heavy dwarven crossbow units. Essentailly creating a pike-bolt tactic.
sling versus armor videos seem needed ^^ Sling could also be good on campaign, because you could use scavenged ammo (less weight to carry) I like that the old Baldur's Gate games had slings as an option for characters with low strength. Blowgun/ poison darts could be another strength equalizer, hit them and run away XD
A good channel to watch concerning the possible accuracy and effectiveness of a sling is Dash Rendar. Granted he is using cheap armor to test against, but it still shows the possibility of groups of slingers in combat. Used as either skirmishers on the flanks to bunch troops into tighter formations to stop flanking maneuvers, picking holes in the front line or suppressing the opposing lightly armored missile troops. There is a reason they were used in ancient warfare for eons. As far as fantasy Dwarves are concerned, they may be short in stature, but they also had the same or more body mass as taller humans. Given the reduced center of gravity, a Dwarven shield wall would be difficult to move short of a heavy cavalry charge. Shield and pike with poleaxes and halberd for follow-up attacks would be the most effective weapon systems for them in a mass battle.
When comparing weapons vs armor it is necessary to consider most people are not in the best armor available. And as pointed out on other channels a few dents start to impact combat effectiveness even if there is no breach.
Thrown weapons (spears, war-darts, etc) from a smaller person with shorter arms will presumably travel less quickly - unless they pair it with an atlatl/string/whatever. Full glass-cannon build.
In the preamble to the battle at Helm's Deep the archery "HOLD!" trope gets realistically subverted. After a few seconds of that _in the rain_ the old man's grip gives out and his arrow is loosed.
30:44 this reminds me of one of the contests in the Jean-Claude Van Damme movie _Bloodsport,_ where a slim, nimble and fast fighter when against a big bruiser. Eventually, the big bruiser caught the fast fighter during an attack, and crushed him.
Also reminder (I know Matt covered this in previous videos but I don't think it was mentioned in this) slings are literal bits of string and sinew. stuff it in a pocket, loop it around the waist or limbs, and you're good. Even a dagger is more cumbersome to carry. Deploying it takes like 10 seconds, and ammunition can be as convenient as whatever rocks you can find. It's worth learning to use for the ease of carry. Granted, this might not translate as well if there are game mechanics at play.
I think for a hobbit dagger and shield would be best. They have a reach disadvantage, anyway, so they need to close the distance. The shield is a really big advantage in this because they can only be attacked from the top. Once the distance is closed a dagger is better than a sword. And always attack the knees.
I come here in defense of axes, hammers and picks. They don't have to be big and slow. They can feature a light head, in the 200-300g range, on a longish and relatively slim handle, and they end up basically as nimble as swords, with a very fast moving head that can pack quite a punch. If it's focused on a small surface, say 1x1cm, or a short edge, say 5cm, or on a point, the damages can be tremendous, especially in the skull or joints. You can see such a tiny head axe in the hand of the Warrior of Capistrano, an Etruscan statue.
You are absolutely underestimating slings. They are seriously powerful. In modern tests I've seen them put a dent in armor big enough to put your entire fist into. How do you think that'd affect someone if you did that to their helm while their head was in there? People tend to imagine the stones to be small pebbles, but they were throwing rocks almost as big as a brick.
Even the normal sized slings got put into the same ball park as some small caliber handguns at short to medium range, might not be deadly if it hits your armor, but i guarantee that the guy that got hit by it will not just simply shrug it off and keep swinging at you.
There’s an annual workshop event in Seattle Washington (usa) called “swordsquatch” my first time less than six months after starting HEMA I went and wore my hand and arm out. Especially with the foam bofers. I kept trying to hold it with two hands to keep going. I can see the advantage of something like a messer, one handed but room for both hands if needed. Or an axe like a fokos or Shepards axe. Two handed with a smaller head. Turn the haft into a sling-staff and you have levers on your leavers.
For those leaning towards slings, one should consider the stick sling, because it doesn't need as much skill as the original sling, because the stick helps along with aiming. Tod's workshhop channel has a video illustrating it's use, and given the right ammo, it could go far and kill.
Stick sling? So take a thing from near supersonic to basically a fastball? I'm going to throw my rounds really hard now, instead of firing them. Wish me luck.
cool video, its crazy to think that the trope of bow and crossbow users in most fantasy worlds mean that the person has a high agility and dexterity to be a deadly bow/crossbow user but in reality is strenght that matters. It would be nice to see a video of ""what weapons would you use against and orc or a dragon or a unicorn ......" lets say for instance an orc, he has stamina and strength and wont die easily, you would need something like a boar spear to stop it, in my unknowingly view. Or a dragon, taking for example a crocodile can a sword pierce a crocodile skin?
Ancients are on record of using lead bullets for slings which would add to the lethality, but it also means that now the slinger needs lead and moulds or to always carry premade bullets. Those Greek-inscribed lead projectiles from the Antiquity come from sites of either military camps or sieges. Which probably means they weren't that common in use because a bag of lead bullets of around one inch or more would be quite a weight to carry along the rest of the equipment.
On the subject of throwing spears, the atlatl would be a great weapon for a little/weaker person. It's basically a piece of wood or bone with a hook on the end that acts as an extension of your arm, allowing you to throw a spear harder and farther.
In an environment like dense jungle or even prairie or places with much hiding spots, small humanoid with small weapons may win through hit hide and run tactics and nimbleness. This might occur in fantasy settings. In fact super dangerous combo could be dense jungle where you have trouble moving in against small camouflaged humanoids attacking you with posioned daggers
For a small person, the best defense is avoiding combat. So, for me, it'd be weapons that don't immediately set one out as a combatant. This means everyday objects, so a knife, that everyone needs. Or, objects that are concealable or have other explanatory reasons for being carried. So, for me a staff (or walking stick) a sling (which could also be affixed to a staff), and a knife (which could be affixed to the staff to make a spear). Perhaps some sort of cooking or eating dish that could be secretly converted to a buckler. These, plus a secret iron skullcap, and/or light mail that can be worn concealed over the torso.
You should move your first sentence to the last, it first sounded like your typical idealism hermit kind of something comment. The rest was insightful.
15:00 - Dash Rendar demonstrates fantastic use of the sling. Depending on the stone, he can deal similar damage to primitive mace and dent in armor, and he's shattered blocks of concrete. Thrand also did some tests with lead sling bullets and a few volleys could bring a shield to tattered ruin.
David vs Goliath is NOT a story about "little person vs big person". That isn't the point of the story if you read it in context. David wasn't a child. He was a "brave man and a warrior" who was known for killing lions and bears by himself. The popular children's book version doesn't match the Bible. The story is really "man takes a gun to a knife fight". Goliath's size was irrelevant when hit in the head with a projectile that has the force of a bullet. If the big idiot put up his shield and charged instead of posturing then he could have closed the gap. Instead David hit him just below his helmet and ended him. I think that a sling would be an excellent weapon for this context. Yes, it requires strength but a weaker person can still kill someone with it. Plus they are so easy to make and convenient that anyone can afford them (and conceal them).
Stealth seems like the best option for such a character who cannot run fast and may be easily overwhelmed. So a falx and dagger would be my weapon picks, along with a blowgun for poison darts, garotte, grappling hook. Good night vision and hearing would be vital. Why a falx I hear you ask? High speed and low encumbrance like a sword, but with more devastating damage per second especially against armour. For example, ambushes of groups could involve a flurry of leg/foot lopping from behind before they knew what hit them.
Poison is a fantasy-themed force multiplier. Ninja used hollowed out eggs filled with shattered glass or ground pepper to blind opponents. Shiruken were typically thrown at the feet of pursuing opponents. A well built caltrop can pierce an armored boot. Using simple magic you could heat a sand bomb and let the wind blow glowing sand into the cracks in an opponents armor. Meteor hammer, rope dart and slings all give reach at low weight. They require more skill and are typically less lethal but a third weapon wrapped around your waist that could potentially keep multiple people at bay several paces away (length of rope from end of handle is typically twice your arm span) is not easy to dismiss.
I think the disconnect with slings is that hunting slings lob rocks, war slings lob lead bullets. The type of ammo is going to have wildly different effects depending on context. Also, when you're looking at Greek and Roman sources, blunt trauma was poorly understood back then, so there's a belief among certain commentators that there's some sort of magical effect happening when a sling bullet damages someone without piercing their armor or even their skin. They also thought that the reason a lead sling bullet deformed on impact was because drag friction was heating it up to melting point. There's a lot of not understanding the physics of slings that turns into mysticism and fanboyishness in the ancient world.
never forget that the best weapons are always speed, surprise, and violence of action if the person doesn't know you're about to attack then the heaviest object you can lift, or the keenest knife you can conceal will cave in their skull or pierce their heart respectively and the easiest fight to win is the one your opponent doesn't know they're fighting
Another point about the sling and crossbow. Since they work at a fair range in some situations, your hero can take a shot and then leg it quickly. Having the bad guy uncertain of where the next shot is coming from and uncertain whether is only one or in fact two people out there can make your hero win by being clever. The "win" in case may even be just delaying or putting the bad guys off their intended plan rather than causing very serious harm.
sling most devastating weapon100 gram lead bullet fly at 100mph staff sling can launch 1pound lead ball at 50-70 mph hand sling having 400 meter range out ranging the bow and can use a shield while slinging
I'm a big, athletic guy, 6'4 255lbs, 14% bodyfat. One of the greatest issues i find that is big guys have is overheating under strenuous exercise. We tend to not dissipate heat as easily and sweat much more as a consequence.
Bigger = lower power to mass ratio, and also greater mass to surface area ratio, generally speaking. Also some tendency to die younger than short people. It's a lot, but we can reach top shelves and see over the heads of crowds... 😅 edited to be less stupid.
People often don't think of things like blow darts & little arrows with poison tips. Such projectiles wont have much impact but just a scratch from one would likely be deadly.
Well of course armor is resistant to most forms of weapons, that’s sort of the point of armor. Regarding slings, however, know that the Roman armies’ surgeons kept on hand a specialized tool for removing sling stones from the body of a legionary.
Fascinating! Seeing how much we can learn from analysing these hypothetical scenarios, what about you check out the opposite side of the spectrum? What weapons a creature that is signficantly taller and stronger than a human would use?
A sling stone gathers such velocity there is little difference from firearms, chunking through plywood. Accuracy is a real issue, and you need space to spin it up. Sling-staffs seem to need less space to deploy (thus tighter grouping of staff-sling troops, more volleys per unit). I really liked your Zulu iklwa episode ( ruclips.net/video/vTJ7sVqiDX4/видео.html ) and it applies here, broken spear shafts shortened into a sword, because only the tip is important anyway. And Atlatl spear throwers can make javelin tossing much more effective at range.
At least early firearms. And I was thinking slings would be a favorite with the smaller lighter characters, not just because of effectiveness, but, it can be concealed easily and ammo is easily user producible. If you use lead and carry a mold you could simply get lead as you traveled saving you from having to carry around a large number of 1oz slugs. Clay can simply be molded by hand and set around the camp fire to bake. I'm not sure spear throwers would work as well for smaller lighter fighters though. The reason for the thrower is to lengthen the length of the throw. So say a halfling using a spear thrower would at best be as good as a full sized human with much longer arms using javelins. It equalizes the throw a bit, but doesn't really give the smaller lighter humanoids an advantage.
One reason why Australian Aboriginal did not use bows is along with the throwing sear they used a launching stick called a womara they are not the only people to use a stick to help propel the light sear at increase speed and distance .😊
Pole arms would be good for guards standing at posts as the weight is resting on the ground. It only needs to be kept verticle which takes little effort.
I'm happy to hear you revisit this topic; I think you're spot on; weaker people would do massively better when there is little armour involved, since grappling/wresting and the weapons that favour strength become relatively more important; swords, spears and shields are the way to go for such people because they rely the least on physical power. And in regards to ranged weapons: Powerful warbows (and even medium weight ones) are stronger than slings in their ability to both kill and damage armour but slings do have other advantages like being used effectively with a shield and being easy to carry alongside any other weapon; the reason classical literature seems to regard them so highly is probably a combition of people using weaker bows in those days and increased hand shock on the shield arm when hit with a bullet rather than an arrow. (the sling bullet transers the energy directly into the target instead of trying to pierce the shield, which causes a more abrupt transfer of energy and makes the hit feel more powerful)
28:34 concerning Armour you've to consider that the same kind of armour, due to the square cube law, weights even more for small people in relation to their own bodyweight.
Estwing 13oz lightweight geology pick. Even a under 10 spaghetti arms girl can put it through a cocunut, a car bonnet, and shark mesh. Nice t shank to deflect blows with if your hand eye coordination isn't as good as oponent. Also great for camping, roadside toilet digging, and geology! Can be thrown and won't break when practising .. or possibly ever. Rock picks are built right.
Would also be very effective against the backs of the knees, the Achilles tendon (if available) and the instep if they didn't have armor on that part. Or the groin. Because I don't care if the bigguns' are wearing a codpiece over their private parts, that's still gonna hurt like hell.
I love that Matt is realistic that there are weapons that a small, weak person would prefer, but being bigger abd stronger helps with just about all weapons.
A sling would be a good range weapon. A light spear would be be a good pole arm. A light weight longsword would be good for a side arm. All of these allow a weaker person to maximize the force they can deliver.
That helm looks terrifying, I can imagine a full armoured Matt with that helm charging at me with a poleaxe... I'm going to have nightmares of that....
In regards to David and Goliath. Phonecia/Philstine helmets of time did not have nose bridge protection. Meaning a stone from a sling could hit the armored person between the eyes and would be highly effective.
staff slings, war darts, poisons, stick thrown spears/arrows/darts etc would all be excellent options, as would traps, caltrops, throwing crosses and more in close, especially backed with poison, would leverage that lesser strength to a vast degree
In testing, my 18c reenacting group found repro Commanche and Iroquoian bows did not penetrate three-ply bullhide Spanish adargas (shields). They did usually penetrate our deerhide cueras, but our cueras (tabards or jerkins) are not the full eight-ply called for in Spanish regulations, so the jury is still out there. So even in the gunpowder era these rules still apply.
The only one I've heard of that didn't really get mentioned here is the atlatl, which a great tool for making those light throwing spears or darts Matt talked about into longer-ranged, higher-velocity weapons. He mentioned the Australian Aborigines using thrown spears and not bows, but woomeras are a big part of that story as far as I know.
imagine if you could armor halflings at one quarter the cost of armoring a human and they can fight twice as long in the armor, numbers and stamina might overwhelm strength and reach advantages.
Great video, very informative! In Japan, the naginata was often considered to be a good weapon for women. Naginata took many forms, but generally was similar to a wakizashi mounted on a shaft 4-5ft long so that the total length of the weapon including blade was a bit taller than the user. It was certainly lighter than a pole axe, and the shaft gave the user more leverage and reach against larger opponents armed with swords.
i feel the need to point out the goedendag here as while it can still he used to deal percussive damage it was also a very effective thrusting weapon vs armor when handled by flemish foot soldiers
13:54 In the Dragonlance books/spinoff DnD setting, Kender, their version of Halflings, have a traditional weapon that is a sling on a staff which can be quite deadly.
#1: crossbow/sling #2 mid-weight relatively short spear #3: light shield and shortsword. You can be nimble with a shorter blade, use the cover of the shield and make a couple quick jabs and get out, and the shield means you don't have to directly parry blows of stronger oppenents. My wife is 7 inches shorter than me and not very strong, but when we practice she does reasonably well with the "spear" but it has to be light and not much longer than she is tall.
Haven't watched yet. My guess is: long pointy stick like weapon good. Heavy bow not good. Piecing and edged weapons are probably better than blunt force weapons. I wonder if slings would be an equaliser? I suspect the length of the sling could compensate for shorter limbs but most powerful person is still advantaged.
At about 30:30 you get to a great point. Our tiny hero must turn their supposed disadvantage into an advantage. Footwork and distance control are their most important weapons, and good tactical use of these will take down a larger opponent eventually. Our small hero must arm themselves accordingly. Light armor and an open faced helmet at most-cover only the most vital spots and maintain all-around vision. A buckler or targe paired with a nimble cut and thrust sword. Alternatively, a slashing spear or a bill depending on the details of our imaginary scene, backed up with a chopping weapon like a falchion, or with a good rondel dagger (this would depend on what the typical armor of the period is). Keep the enemy at bay, wind them or backpedal as needed, harry them as the opportunity arises, and let them tire themselves into submission.
Hot take: Polearma and spears are not good weapons for dwarfs. They would be outreached anyway by…polearms and spears. For such short but strong and heavy creatures, living in mountains and hills, a very good kit would be the late-republican legionary kit. Same with tactics: brutal head-on clash of infantry, with volleys of heavy throwing weapons followed by a swift and violent charge. Very dwarvish!
If we are considering the dwarves as similar strength or stronger than humans, with good stamina, I'd say the same. Short weapons, as much armor as possible, and aggressive tactics at close range.
Typical targets could be those often neglected when fighting humanoïds: kneecaps, hips, legs, thighs, either with short, beefy, stabby swords (gladius?), blunt weapons (warhammers, maces), or perhaps dagger? A small, stocky, low center-of-gravity dwarf might be able to wrestle, tackle and stab his opponent with relative ease (inside of the thigh, crotch).
I saw a hunter demonstrate that surprisingly little velocity was needed for an arrow to pierce through a deer's thorax (they demonstrated on a carcass). When ballistics gelatin is shot, it implies far more velocity is needed, though it seems this 'gel' is only good at simulating very small and very high velocity projectiles as the gel grips the greater surface area of the arrow in a way that it doesn't for a high velocity bullet. This is especially the case if the point is really sharp, you just don't need a lot of momentum or kinetic energy for that to pierce through tissue. Yeah, low velocity isn't good against armor but it's not hard to make armor that's resistant to even the most powerful warbows.
My little brother was really effective in small battles. He'd wait until the fight got going, then he'd sneak up and stab people. If he managed to get behind them, he could get two or three people before they realized what was happening. He would target people who had full face helmets because he was short enough to go below their effective field of view.
I love these for brainstorming. My biggest conundrum to-date is on how to balance, believably, armour in games. How do we give players the choice between full plate and lightly armoured kit, without greatly disadvantaging those without the plate armour? what would be a reasonable and realistic approach to this? centering it around economic restrictions seems not that great to engage with as a player in a fantasy/action game
A thought on the ax, maybe not a long battle chopper, but, maybe something like a Frankish throwing ax would be quite effective up close. I've seen them split shields, so even if you're wearing armor, its going to hurt. Especially if they clock your knee or your groin.
I know we shouldn't really quote movies but to prove a point, in Conan the Destroyer his little mate the thief has a dagger fixed to each wrist and his technique is to basically jump on someone and 'poke poke pokey' you do what you can to make it work btw Scott of Kentucky Ballistics put up a video....'are lawn darts lethal?' remember those 70_80s plumbata and he was being Really Serious trashed a ballistic gel torso
Any technique that involves a smaller, weaker assailant closing distance into grappling range of a physically superior combatant would be somewhat suicidal in reality. It works in the movies, but it would only work in reality if the inferior attacker had a numbers advantage, and even then some of them would probably die. There are no reasons why the bigger, stronger fighter wouldn’t have a dagger of his own and be perfectly happy to use it.
I gave my hobgoblin princess a flatbow and a saber with a nice looking yalman. She uses leaf points for hunting and bodkins in combat. The bow isn't extremely powerful, but she targets the face and neck. A proper hit is devastating, but even a strike on the helmet is a real attention getter.
Small people have a bit of an advantage in cluttered terrain, able to take advantage of smaller gaps and cover. It may be that a shorter weapon, such as a short stabbing spear, might be more optimal for them than something with more reach because it will substantially increase their mobility in said environment. Not so great on the plains, but well handy in a tavern or cavern!
Would love to see a video on indigenous people's spears from around the world, used mostly for hunting,skirmishing and self-defense. Also about bows, Comanche bows tended to be over 50 pds slightly, made from osage orange wood and sinew. And Amazonian natives use poison arrows , with curare or bullet ant poison. And lastly, war darts are way under rated.
📲 Install Raid now ➡pl.go-ga.me/bhx8atyy and get an amazing in game-loot and a special starter pack with an Epic champion Vergis and Rector Drath upon reaching level 25! 🔥
🍀New users can get Legendary Sun Wukong through promocode MONKEYKING available for new players by January 7th
🧑🎄Play the Xmas Minigame ➡ xmas.raidrpg.com for a chance to win a $5000 gift card, Gaming console, Smartphone, $100 Amazon card or in-game loot!
📱 Link to enter Raid Shadow Legends codes (1 in 24 hours) ➡ plarium.com/en/redeem/raid-shadow-legends/
What is your Clan's name in Raid? I cannot find you by your name.
I love the way Matt casually transitioned into the sponser ad. That was smooth 👌
If you haven't already you should play "Knights Fight 2", it's really good. It's a historically based 3D fighting game with medieval armour & weapons.
ruclips.net/video/ev9OjxuzoU8/видео.htmlfeature=shared
take a look at archaic arms. he caves in a roman helmet with clay shot
No mention of Brigandine.
A think coat, or gambeson let alone brigandine does not impair mobility while not a fraction as taking on breath as full plate harness.
maille really depends on how well it is made to sit on the waist & shoulders.
If you are are older or smaller then Brigandine is your best choice in my opinion as due to my failed health with 1/2 my ling capacity I would never choose to wear plate harness.
Regarding sling stones against armor. Spanish records about fighting the tribes in the new world recount how obsidian tipped weapons like arrows and darts were utterly useless against their metal plates, and they also described how the sling stones REALLY hurt even through armor.
So there's that.
But the Spanish themselves used weapons that were useless against armor. Not that that doesn’t mean it isn’t still an extreme advantage to them. Also take in mind that the “darts” are about the length of a man, supposedly. Of course some projectiles would hit them on unarmed spots.
@triumphant39 Yes yes, I'm aware. Just talking specifically about the slings since it's what Matt talked about in the video. If they "really hurt" when they struck your armor, no doubt in my mind they can mame or kill you with a square hit in an unarmored part.
Didn't they use clay projectiles that shattered in impact? Those shards would be extremely dangerous, especially with open faced morion helmets
@@Glimmlampe1982 frankly the clay projectiles used more for consistent weight,i doubt it would shatter against whatever armor the local use (which definitely what those clay projectile originaly meant to use against)
@@leobuana7430depends what armor they used, hide armor, no, wood armor yes
But I wasnt thinking those clay projectiles were designed as shrapnel, but they worked as shrapnel against metal armor.
About slings: up to 5% of Youth baseball injuries are fractures caused by baseballs. A baseball is a lot softer than a rock. A baseball also does not concentrate force nearly as well. A rock from a sling also moves much faster than the fastest baseballs, 225-240 km per hour. Baseball pitchers are _not even trying_ to fracture bones
Yes and being a range weapon, the hero can perhaps be using the local geography to slow the enemy enough to get multiple shots. Thus perhaps the leader of the group can be taken out along with someone else who is near the back
Find a video of a Balearic slinging contest.
The guys are slinging tennis balls at targets, but the action is similar to a baseball pitcher, - with a 50cm extension on his forearm.
Close range slinging is very similar to a baseball pitch.
Now consider the projectile.
The Greek writers describe their mercenary slingers using lead bullets, whilst amateurs and middle eastern barbarians sling rocks.
I've seen bullets (Museum at the knight's palace - Rhodes).
About the size of a thumb bone and shaped like an american football.
An ideal rock would probably be a pebble slightly smaller than a golf ball.
Imagine the speeds these light projectiles could be launched at.
Imagine the shaped lead bullet spiralling toward a target, too fast and small to see or dodge, and the penetrating injuries.
Imagine a bigger pebble and the concussion and fractures it could cause.
The Greeks recommended slings against heavily armoured enemies, and their short-bows against unarmoured enemies.
@@kensmith5694 If they knew the area, they could sling over a hill and strike targets on the road behind out of retaliation (or chasing) range. Plus any follow up about "bandits on the road", so they search travellers, only finding belts and string but no bows or swords... some stealth advantages there with a weapon you can disassemble easily and scavenge the ammo from local stones.
@@steveholmes11that was also because good luck catching a light, agile slinger in armour. You would need horses to catch them.
A 200g rock thrown at 150km/h has about 170 Joules of energy. A couple of joules already sting so I expect this amount of power to break bones. Espacially because rocks are pretty hard and should transfer almost 100% of their energy.
A toddler with a dagger would be horrifying, at least in normal households.
When my daughter was three she snuck up on me and pulled my skeen dubh out of my kilt hose without the sheath and tried to run off with it. She was laughing kind of maniacally when she did it.
@@faolanliath6687they cannot process remorse or empathy
Kids also have adult level grip strength. Our primate ancestors had their babies cling into their mother's back just about 24/7. That gorilla grip hasn't quite left us
I could climb up ropes at age 8 but being small is an advantage@@houselightkell
... but not more than a toddler with a halberd. Toddlers with polearms are the stuff of nightmares.
The spear concept was also demonstrated again in"Seven Samurai". The heroic ronin, after getting to the village, start forming the villagers into groups and outfit them with bamboo spears; as such, by the end, they have some effectiveness against the bandits (like when the town coward skewers a guy by himself)
My first thought!
As Matt was talking about this, I was thinking the same thing, but also thought about how the writers missed the opportunity to use this tactic in Walking Dead. Just a handful of people with spears would be extremely effective in that sort of fantasy world. The zombies are slow and don't try to parry or dodge, etc.
@@roentgen571 well, they did, back when they took The Prison. STabbing Zeds through the fence.
But, yknow, the plot has to move along, so they abandoned spears at the same time they decided against building a farm in their massive prison complex to continue the syndication of the series.
"I killed a guy with a trident!"
"I saw that, Brick. You might want to lay low for a while."
About Slings: If I remember correctly Caeser described how the Celts used slings very effectively - in the sense of completely obliterating faces of Legionnaires when the got hit.
Yes, a practiced person with a sling can be accurate. There is another thing that a sling may allow that some other weapons don't. It is possible to shoot at an angle that is well above 45 degrees so that the shot falls down onto the opposing troops. This forces them to raise their shields exposing the lower part of their body. Someone else can take the shot at the legs. In the extreme case: the same person with the sling may be fast enough to send the second stone at the legs.
Slings can also be used as bashing weapons , just by not releasing .
a good slinger can do 100yds and hit a small car. at point blank a stone will go through 1/2" plywood.
And lead bullets were better than stones
Similarly in the conquest of Mesoamerica and southamerica by the spanish, if records by the spainards are the source, it seems the Slings were among the most efective native weapons against them
7:20 Reference Native American/First nation tribes and armor they actually did use it prior to the introduction of firearms through the fur trade. Then, just like was happening in Europe, the armor was abandoned in favor of lighter skirmishing tactics. Prior to that though they had heavy armored warriors and lighter ranged skirmishers just like in Ancient Rome and Greece. Check a channel called Malcom P.L. who has done videos of a reconstruction of pre-Columbian Iroquoian armor (I'll link one below).
13:30 Medical journals from ancient Rome talked about having to remove sling stones that had buried into the flesh and modern reproductions by inexperienced modern slingers have been shown to produce foot pound energy levels equivalent to some lower powered pistol cartridges (think lighter .38 Special target loads if you're familiar with firearms). So they weren't equivalent to a rifle or shotgun but certainly capable of killing a man sized target. As a weapon for smaller people they don't require much strength but aiming it properly is more complex than bows and requires a lot of practice to judge distance and adjust the release point as you're spinning the sling. So, just like a longbowman had to train from a young age to build up the strength, a slinger had to practice from an early age to develop that judgement. For a fictional character it would be unlikely that a nobleman would have spent that kind of time unless they were unorthodox and hung out with a mentor with a peasant/poacher class background.
On a general comment about blunt vs sharp weapons, if we're talking about war clubs/hammers the weight would be a legitimate concern but, depending on your setting, blackjack/'lifesavers' (the latter an old English weapon with a small lead weight braided into a short length of rope), nightstick/belaying pins or cudgels like the African knobkerrie and Irish shillelagh were also popular in cities and towns and could be a preferred weapon of a rogue style character.
ruclips.net/video/qmkQS8_MODE/видео.html
I think a better analogue than a .38 special is beanbag shotgun rounds which have almost identical size, mass and velocity though beanbag rounds are trying to be "soft", they are in fact filled with lead shot, they aren't very soft in practice.
Beanbag rounds can kill but it's less likely, it requires a hit to a very vulnerable and unprotected part of the body like the cranium or sternum. It's one of those things that's "possibly lethal" but not probably-lethal. It's far more likely to just cause painful welts that don't need any medical treatment other than rest.
Some very long slings can hurl huge stones larger than a man's fist, these aver much deadlier but you need to be fully grown to hurt such things, this is more like Olympic hammer throw than the shepherd's sling.
@@Treblaine If you're looking for an alternative analogy, bean bag rounds would be a bad choice. More like the old high caliber, low velocity lead balls from black powder flintlock pistols. There's still more than enough velocity to penetrate human flesh and bone.
I'll link a video where someone managed to get several inches of penetration in ballistic gelatin using a slung lead "football" (American style) shaped shot. Now this was done at point blank range but by modern slinger who wouldn't have had anywhere near the same training as a traditional slinger would have had. So this is not a child's toy that a lot of people in the HEMA community seem to think it is.
ruclips.net/video/aGFCR5oDjKI/видео.html
Extremely interesting link, thank you mate!
@@Treblaine Rubber bullets is a much better analogy. these MUST be fired at the ground to bounce into targets to cause severe bruising, breaking small bones. A direct hit can and will cause death from fractures, penetration wounds that rarely exit (much like sling bullets found embedded inside ribs and chest cavities or skulls), and internal damage from blunt force.
@@littlekong7685 "A direct hit can and will cause death from fractures"
People are directly hit in the body by bean-bag rounds very frequently yet typically do not die. Sometimes they do but that is NOT the normal outcome for them to even need to go to the hospital.
These sling bullets "embedded in ribs" is not enough, it's not particularly debilitating, Theodore Roosevelt famously sustained such an injury when a very low power pistol round was fired at him and after passing through his glasses case only embedded in his ribs. This was such a minor wound that he gave a speech before going to a hospital where the hospital didn't prescribe any treatment other than washing the wound. It healed quickly without complication.
You can expect the sling to be lethal if it hits somewhere very vulnerable like the cranium, or if the sling stone is huge, more like an olympic hammer throw.
Naginata is a Japanese polearm very popular among women, also in an historical context. Its use relay more in whole body rotation than in upper body strength. It could be the optimal weapon for a smaller weaker character in a fantasy or even in an historical fiction
Yepp wasn't it considered their weapon to defend their house historically from bandits etc..when their husband was away as well?
The association is almost entirely a culture thing.
A less weak person will be able to use the polearm better than the more weak person.
Simply put it, unless we go into firearms or projectile weapon that reload with mechanical assistance, the weaker person is doom.
@@jintsuubest9331 I wouldn't say 'doomed', exactly. Of course, size and strength (and sex, because biology, when comparing men v. women) is always an advantage in hand to hand combat. Choosing the right weapon to mitigate (not negate) those disadvantages can go a long way. It's about shrinking that capability gap.
Barehanded, a child or a woman, even a small man, is always going to be heavily disadvantaged against large man, right? Give them both knives, though, and the big dude still has the advantage, obviously, but the smaller person is now an actual threat. Put the pointy bit of metal on a long pole, the disparity shrinks a bit more...but yeah, it's still there, of course. The smaller person is simply increasing their chances of survival.
@@LionAstrology Correct
Check the pillow spears too, the short one's with attached rope, as something for the samurai's female family members to keep on hand for self defence if they don't get the time to kit up.
When I was younger I made a sling and would go places and throw rocks with them. I'm definitely not a big strong dude and I don't even play sports where you throw things, so I'm probably a perfect test, and I can get those rocks going terrifyingly fast. I eventually switched to tennis balls when one of the rocks broke in half against a surface and one of the halves came back and went whizzing past me an inch from my throat. I can't even imagine how much power you could get behind a lead bullet with someone that had a real good throwing arm. From what I remember of the historical accounts getting hit by one is no joke. Them's that die'll be the lucky ones.
Pretty sure he must have expressed doubt just to get interaction from everyone who know's he is wrong, but I wouldn't put it past him to just be wrong.
I can understand him underestimating slings a bit but he never touched about the economy of weapons, for an economy if not maintenance of almost none, the price to power(or something) ratio is incomparable. a gun is the only thing higher/better but also at a higher upfront investment and and way higher maintenance.
I also remember a documentary I saw years ago on pygmies. They were hunting elephants...yes, elephants....with what was essentially a partizan. Double edged blade half the length of the weapon. It was very effective. The hunter would hide in the underbrush then pop out and stab the elephant once in the vitals. Overall length appeared to be 5" to 5.5" So essentially if they were fighting an enemy they have reach, cutting power, and the ability to stab. I was quite impressed with their weapons and survival skills.
29:30 Something to consider about armor weight vs person size is that due to the square-cube-law (as an object grows its volume increases faster than its surface) a larger person might actually carry less armor per body weight than a smaller one
As an object grows its volume increases, hence larger armour will have more volume and with it more weight.
@@anaussie213 as person size increases their muscle strength increases with volume while the required armor mass increases with surface area (since the surface area determines how much area needs to be protected) so a large person has less armor weight per muscle strength
(This is assuming that a bigger person doesn't necessarily wears thicker armor)
@ armour isn't 2D it's 3D so bigger armour weighs more than the same shaped armour that is smaller, that's the square cube law. It's also why in strength sports the lighter weight classes are stronger p4p than the heavier ones, I mean just look at a 155 pound gymnast doing chin ups and then watch a heavyweight struggle doing them (and that's moving their own bodyweight not even taking into account added weight).
@@anaussie213 assuming that a bigger person doesn't necessarily wear thicker armor you can essentially treat the armor as 2d
@ volume = length x width x height. So even if its thickness (width) is the same the increased height and length will make it comparatively heavier.
Slings, especially with lead shot, can be devastating weapons. I really think that you underestimate them.
You need some good strength to make them do real damage. And small person==shorter sling.
Put the short person on a stool and their sling can be as long as you like... Slings and heavy shot maybe couldn't bypass any meaningful armour or shield - but they were fast, hard to see coming, and any wounds they did inflict could be painful to devastating, especially if they hit the skull. Practically speaking, they take up virtually no space to carry, and even the shot would fit into a compact pouch. I do expect they were used more as volley weapons though.
@@thekaxmax Not true at all, the power comes from spinning fast, someone weak could swing it around fast no problem. Also they can be swung horizontally over the head, so length isn't much of an issue either.
@@kegluneq6306 They don't volley very well because they require significant spaces between shooters.
Of course it's possible. But many more archers, javelineers or dartists? can be effective in the same frontage.
Not seeing the incoming slingshot is very significant in an age when shields are common.
Targets who'd raise their shields to a volley of arrows won't have the same option against slings.
My impresison of slings is a handy skirmish weapon, which relies solely on practice and technique.
@steveholmes11 For the volley aspect (i.e. unaimed shots delivered en masse), I'm thinking of both the long ranges that could be achieved that would make placed shots *extremely* impressive, and the possibility that Romans used drilled shot that produced a loud whistling noise for psychological effect. This latter aspect would be emphasised through volume of fire as much as deadliness of aim.
I do agree with the space limitations being a factor though, as well as the very high level of skill required to use a sling effectively in the first place.
I would argue the best weapon for a small and weak person is a large and strong friend.
It also comes with a tactic. Let the large, strong friend be the focus of the enemy's attention, then stab him in the back or side/trip his legs/bonk his knee...
A large and strong friend is not a weapon
"David and Goliath" was my immediate thought when reading the title. You need _practice_ for attacking individual targets, but I bet they're much more effective against armor than you think they are. That's because of the concussive force of high-velocity stones.
Did you see Joe and Michael train each other with their respective weapons and Tod in awe?
One of my favorite things about depictions of dwarves in fantasy, especially in like Warhammer, is that they often use normal sized shields that are just the same size as them. Also, I'm surprised he didn't mention the billhook, my first blush reaction was spear or similar lighter polearm like the billhook would compensate their reach disadvantage, thrusting can be lethal without a tremendous amount of strength, and a polearm gives you additional leverage if it gives you the option for some type of swinging attack, such as with an edge or a perpendicular spike like a pick.
Dont' forget that it can also be used for tripping.
Nobody's taller than the last man standing
Small, weak person here, and my money is on the atlatl. I can wallop with one, and it took me little practice (relative to archery) to get a solid but basic proficiency. It’s really all the best boobs of a spear, with the addition of a force multiplier. The darts also being lightweight gives you the ability to carry many more than one could with a heavier, hand-thrown spear.
Good point. Have you tried against armor, and compared it with the results from someone who are bigger and stronger? If you guys were mostly equal in penetration, then I would put my money on you because you'll be a smaller target in a duel.
Especially if the dart has rechangable foreshafts, then you wear the headshafts on a sling on your back, the Atlatl thrower on the belt and you can use whatever kind of dart tip as you like in a smaller quiver in the belt even poisoned tips.
Sling as a projectile weapon (easy to carry doesn't require much strength), primary weapon: naginata (does not require upperbody strength and have great reach), side arm: a sturdy smallsword (very nibble and light at medium range), close up weapon: rondel dagger (excellent at penetrating armor with little force), Armor: chainmail over gambeson + a buckler and a open face helmet. Overall, it is not too much weight since the naginata can be used as a walking stick.
I don't know about these pole weapons, they're extremely vulnerable to someone who is larger and stronger just grabbing it and wrenching it out of your hand. This is a problem you can see with adults who spar in HEMA, it doesn't take much of a size/weight disparity to overcome the leverage advantage because the leverage can be used to work both ways, the length beyond the fulcrum is as far as the other side.
Yes, a pole arm is really good if they are deploying arms that try to exploit reach like longswords, but is very vulnerable to grapplers.
The reason naginata were considered a proper weapon for a woman is cultural, not physical. The Japanese understanding of cutting power is derived from leverage which is why the fairly short katana still has a substantial three-hand-long grip or nearly so, for power. Naginata take that and give you more leverage than nodachi or tachi, so you don't 'need' to be physically strong to generate cutting power. The reach advantage is very real, thus 'fit for a woman'; she doesn't need to be strong and she can stay out of arm's reach of the common soldier so her pretty face won't get incidental cuts.
In reality, even the smaller naginata blades were as long as katana blades, and the longer ones are shockingly long. As a weapon they're all heavier than a katana and that really wears on your endurance; they are harder to use for a given length of time than a katana. Keeping space with them is paramount to your safety, and that's much harder than keeping a stalemate with a yari.
Samurai also used naginata, quite extensively. The cutting power you can make when you have the physique and the leverage is quite awe inspiring.
@cheyannei5983 There were design differences between naginata made for women and men. As time went by, the naginata became more adapted for women, and men stopped using it altogether. A spear is a great weapon, but the naginata has an advantage against multiple opponents since it slashes instead of stabs.
Going beyond one-on-one, the Roman Legions had a whole class of lighter boys/men in light partial armor using throwing weapons and slings to front and flanks and rear of the heavy guys. They no doubt caused Roman opponents trouble enough that it was worth doing.
Yes, although it was a bit out of necessity. Not everyone could afford good armor and a sword. Only grown men who already have some wealth. Younger and poorer boys necessarily had lighter equipment and, as I heard, their possible death was less important to society. There were many children in the past. And the rich father of the family who knew how to work... He shouldn't necessarily run towards larger opponents, throw javelins and try to escape. This is a task for someone young, agile and less important.
@@Zbigniew_Nowak "There were many children in the past"
Yes, but child mortality was like 50-75% (ie. in ancient Rome, up to 50% mortality before age 6y, up to 50% of these before hitting adulthood...). So, having 6-8 children was necessary just to prevent population shrinkage. More than 8 for actual population growth.
@@OreoBambino Well, don't convince me that children are important, I wasn't the one who sent my 17-year-old son with a javelin in the front line against the enemies. But a traveler said that many simple peoples still have this approach today. Parents eat first, then children. If the child dies of hunger - it doesn't matter. It's easy to make a new baby, they say. And the father of the family is difficult to replace.
Merry’s sword had stabbed him from behind, shearing through the black mantle and passing up beneath the hauberk had pierced the sinew behind his mighty knee.
Ie, hit placement and targeting weaknesses are vital. Plus, blindsiding your opponents.
Yup. Small, inconspicuous, discreet creatures could indeed operate in that way.
i think small but strong characters is an interesting category, dwarves for example, where they lack reach but not strength, making stuff like polearms and spears the most effective melee option.
In D&D lore, the signature weapon of dwarves is the Dwarven Longhammer, which is exactly what it sounds like.
I don't think dwarf has a reach disadvantage.
It would be equally difficult for a humanoid to land effective hit back at the dwarf.
@@Fatespinner reminds me of dwarf fortress, a popular weapon is silver war hammers due to their weight. based on the sprite of the steam version, they seem to be polearms, so yea lol.
@@jintsuubest9331
In martial arts, being tall is a big advantage. Small people have less reach and are easier to hit in the head.
Fantasy dwarves would be interesting. Throwing spears wouldn't work as well for them, because shorter limbs produce less velocity and therefore a weaker throw with less range. However, their short strong limbs would control pole weapons really well. They also wouldn't be as good at cavalry, because they would struggle with large horses. So they would probably have to develop a lot of anti cavalry tactics.
I imagine dwarf holds developing something like the Swiss Pikeman. Heavily armoured formation of dwarves with big pikes, just obliterating cavalry and enemy infantry units. With halberd and ax wielding dwarves there to take on armoured infantry. Supported with heavy dwarven crossbow units. Essentailly creating a pike-bolt tactic.
sling versus armor videos seem needed ^^
Sling could also be good on campaign, because you could use scavenged ammo (less weight to carry)
I like that the old Baldur's Gate games had slings as an option for characters with low strength.
Blowgun/ poison darts could be another strength equalizer, hit them and run away XD
A good channel to watch concerning the possible accuracy and effectiveness of a sling is Dash Rendar. Granted he is using cheap armor to test against, but it still shows the possibility of groups of slingers in combat. Used as either skirmishers on the flanks to bunch troops into tighter formations to stop flanking maneuvers, picking holes in the front line or suppressing the opposing lightly armored missile troops. There is a reason they were used in ancient warfare for eons.
As far as fantasy Dwarves are concerned, they may be short in stature, but they also had the same or more body mass as taller humans. Given the reduced center of gravity, a Dwarven shield wall would be difficult to move short of a heavy cavalry charge. Shield and pike with poleaxes and halberd for follow-up attacks would be the most effective weapon systems for them in a mass battle.
When comparing weapons vs armor it is necessary to consider most people are not in the best armor available. And as pointed out on other channels a few dents start to impact combat effectiveness even if there is no breach.
There is also a reason slings disappeared from battlefields while bows and javelins continued to be used for a thousand more years.
Ahmad ibn Fadlan: I cannot lift this. Herger the Joyous: Grow stronger.
The 13th warrior!
Give an Arab a sword and he makes a knife...
Thrown weapons (spears, war-darts, etc) from a smaller person with shorter arms will presumably travel less quickly - unless they pair it with an atlatl/string/whatever. Full glass-cannon build.
In the preamble to the battle at Helm's Deep the archery "HOLD!" trope gets realistically subverted. After a few seconds of that _in the rain_ the old man's grip gives out and his arrow is loosed.
And at night, under heavy rain and at maximum range, this old man managed to shoot an Uruk right in the neck. Truly a top-tier archer.
@@nicklab1927 he was hailed as a legend across internet when he passed. R.I.P.🫡
30:44 this reminds me of one of the contests in the Jean-Claude Van Damme movie _Bloodsport,_ where a slim, nimble and fast fighter when against a big bruiser. Eventually, the big bruiser caught the fast fighter during an attack, and crushed him.
Also reminder (I know Matt covered this in previous videos but I don't think it was mentioned in this) slings are literal bits of string and sinew. stuff it in a pocket, loop it around the waist or limbs, and you're good. Even a dagger is more cumbersome to carry. Deploying it takes like 10 seconds, and ammunition can be as convenient as whatever rocks you can find. It's worth learning to use for the ease of carry. Granted, this might not translate as well if there are game mechanics at play.
small MC lugging a bunch of javelins into adventures sounds real fun actually :)
I think for a hobbit dagger and shield would be best. They have a reach disadvantage, anyway, so they need to close the distance. The shield is a really big advantage in this because they can only be attacked from the top. Once the distance is closed a dagger is better than a sword. And always attack the knees.
Great video as always. Though I admire greatly those weapons on the wall, I'd love to know where you got that sweater!
same!
I come here in defense of axes, hammers and picks. They don't have to be big and slow. They can feature a light head, in the 200-300g range, on a longish and relatively slim handle, and they end up basically as nimble as swords, with a very fast moving head that can pack quite a punch. If it's focused on a small surface, say 1x1cm, or a short edge, say 5cm, or on a point, the damages can be tremendous, especially in the skull or joints. You can see such a tiny head axe in the hand of the Warrior of Capistrano, an Etruscan statue.
You are absolutely underestimating slings. They are seriously powerful. In modern tests I've seen them put a dent in armor big enough to put your entire fist into. How do you think that'd affect someone if you did that to their helm while their head was in there? People tend to imagine the stones to be small pebbles, but they were throwing rocks almost as big as a brick.
Even the normal sized slings got put into the same ball park as some small caliber handguns at short to medium range, might not be deadly if it hits your armor, but i guarantee that the guy that got hit by it will not just simply shrug it off and keep swinging at you.
There’s an annual workshop event in Seattle Washington (usa) called “swordsquatch” my first time less than six months after starting HEMA I went and wore my hand and arm out. Especially with the foam bofers. I kept trying to hold it with two hands to keep going.
I can see the advantage of something like a messer, one handed but room for both hands if needed. Or an axe like a fokos or Shepards axe. Two handed with a smaller head.
Turn the haft into a sling-staff and you have levers on your leavers.
For those leaning towards slings, one should consider the stick sling, because it doesn't need as much skill as the original sling, because the stick helps along with aiming. Tod's workshhop channel has a video illustrating it's use, and given the right ammo, it could go far and kill.
Stick sling? So take a thing from near supersonic to basically a fastball?
I'm going to throw my rounds really hard now, instead of firing them. Wish me luck.
cool video, its crazy to think that the trope of bow and crossbow users in most fantasy worlds mean that the person has a high agility and dexterity to be a deadly bow/crossbow user but in reality is strenght that matters.
It would be nice to see a video of ""what weapons would you use against and orc or a dragon or a unicorn ......"
lets say for instance an orc, he has stamina and strength and wont die easily, you would need something like a boar spear to stop it, in my unknowingly view.
Or a dragon, taking for example a crocodile can a sword pierce a crocodile skin?
Ancients are on record of using lead bullets for slings which would add to the lethality, but it also means that now the slinger needs lead and moulds or to always carry premade bullets. Those Greek-inscribed lead projectiles from the Antiquity come from sites of either military camps or sieges. Which probably means they weren't that common in use because a bag of lead bullets of around one inch or more would be quite a weight to carry along the rest of the equipment.
Great video, and that bloody helm at the end is a work of art!
On the subject of throwing spears, the atlatl would be a great weapon for a little/weaker person. It's basically a piece of wood or bone with a hook on the end that acts as an extension of your arm, allowing you to throw a spear harder and farther.
And use it with interchangable tips on foreshafts then you han carry more tipped foreshafts than actual headdarts, even poisoned tips.
In an environment like dense jungle or even prairie or places with much hiding spots, small humanoid with small weapons may win through hit hide and run tactics and nimbleness. This might occur in fantasy settings. In fact super dangerous combo could be dense jungle where you have trouble moving in against small camouflaged humanoids attacking you with posioned daggers
Thank you for continuing to be Matt Easton!
For a small person, the best defense is avoiding combat. So, for me, it'd be weapons that don't immediately set one out as a combatant. This means everyday objects, so a knife, that everyone needs. Or, objects that are concealable or have other explanatory reasons for being carried. So, for me a staff (or walking stick) a sling (which could also be affixed to a staff), and a knife (which could be affixed to the staff to make a spear). Perhaps some sort of cooking or eating dish that could be secretly converted to a buckler. These, plus a secret iron skullcap, and/or light mail that can be worn concealed over the torso.
I would also recommend good, light running shoes!
You should move your first sentence to the last, it first sounded like your typical idealism hermit kind of something comment. The rest was insightful.
@@MangaGamified Your second sentence is insightful, too. Thanks!
15:00 - Dash Rendar demonstrates fantastic use of the sling. Depending on the stone, he can deal similar damage to primitive mace and dent in armor, and he's shattered blocks of concrete. Thrand also did some tests with lead sling bullets and a few volleys could bring a shield to tattered ruin.
David vs Goliath is NOT a story about "little person vs big person". That isn't the point of the story if you read it in context. David wasn't a child. He was a "brave man and a warrior" who was known for killing lions and bears by himself. The popular children's book version doesn't match the Bible.
The story is really "man takes a gun to a knife fight". Goliath's size was irrelevant when hit in the head with a projectile that has the force of a bullet. If the big idiot put up his shield and charged instead of posturing then he could have closed the gap. Instead David hit him just below his helmet and ended him.
I think that a sling would be an excellent weapon for this context. Yes, it requires strength but a weaker person can still kill someone with it. Plus they are so easy to make and convenient that anyone can afford them (and conceal them).
Also the slings range isn't governed by strength but length of the sling. So it is an ideal long range weapon for the small.
Staff sling can bring significant power and damage
Stealth seems like the best option for such a character who cannot run fast and may be easily overwhelmed. So a falx and dagger would be my weapon picks, along with a blowgun for poison darts, garotte, grappling hook. Good night vision and hearing would be vital.
Why a falx I hear you ask? High speed and low encumbrance like a sword, but with more devastating damage per second especially against armour. For example, ambushes of groups could involve a flurry of leg/foot lopping from behind before they knew what hit them.
Danggg... Pulling that long bow back like that, its fairly thick as well, and holding it like you did, thats honestly quite impressive.
Poison is a fantasy-themed force multiplier.
Ninja used hollowed out eggs filled with shattered glass or ground pepper to blind opponents.
Shiruken were typically thrown at the feet of pursuing opponents. A well built caltrop can pierce an armored boot.
Using simple magic you could heat a sand bomb and let the wind blow glowing sand into the cracks in an opponents armor.
Meteor hammer, rope dart and slings all give reach at low weight. They require more skill and are typically less lethal but a third weapon wrapped around your waist that could potentially keep multiple people at bay several paces away (length of rope from end of handle is typically twice your arm span) is not easy to dismiss.
I think the disconnect with slings is that hunting slings lob rocks, war slings lob lead bullets. The type of ammo is going to have wildly different effects depending on context. Also, when you're looking at Greek and Roman sources, blunt trauma was poorly understood back then, so there's a belief among certain commentators that there's some sort of magical effect happening when a sling bullet damages someone without piercing their armor or even their skin. They also thought that the reason a lead sling bullet deformed on impact was because drag friction was heating it up to melting point. There's a lot of not understanding the physics of slings that turns into mysticism and fanboyishness in the ancient world.
never forget that the best weapons are always speed, surprise, and violence of action
if the person doesn't know you're about to attack then the heaviest object you can lift, or the keenest knife you can conceal will cave in their skull or pierce their heart respectively
and the easiest fight to win is the one your opponent doesn't know they're fighting
Another point about the sling and crossbow. Since they work at a fair range in some situations, your hero can take a shot and then leg it quickly. Having the bad guy uncertain of where the next shot is coming from and uncertain whether is only one or in fact two people out there can make your hero win by being clever. The "win" in case may even be just delaying or putting the bad guys off their intended plan rather than causing very serious harm.
Ah, but you forget the Wee Free Men don't really need weapons. If they get up your pant leg, you"ve had it.
A hobbit with a plumbarta, who then can stab with that plumbarta as a makeshift dagger sounds terrifying now.
An atl atl would be intriguing. A relatively small spear force multiplied by leverage. And fairly compact to pack along.
sling most devastating weapon100 gram lead bullet fly at 100mph staff sling can launch 1pound lead ball at 50-70 mph hand sling having 400 meter range out ranging the bow and can use a shield while slinging
I'm a big, athletic guy, 6'4 255lbs, 14% bodyfat. One of the greatest issues i find that is big guys have is overheating under strenuous exercise. We tend to not dissipate heat as easily and sweat much more as a consequence.
Makes sense. Animals that live in cold temperatures are often larger for that reason.
@@Lilliathi
So the Megafauna died off because of overheating at the beginning of the Holocene.
Bigger = lower power to mass ratio, and also greater mass to surface area ratio, generally speaking. Also some tendency to die younger than short people. It's a lot, but we can reach top shelves and see over the heads of crowds... 😅
edited to be less stupid.
And losing our balance sometimes😅.
And bending down.
@theperson8275 don't tell then our weaknesses
People often don't think of things like blow darts & little arrows with poison tips. Such projectiles wont have much impact but just a scratch from one would likely be deadly.
as a little tiny 5'2 guy, I find this guide very useful during my adventure in a brutal world filled with 6' giants!
Well of course armor is resistant to most forms of weapons, that’s sort of the point of armor. Regarding slings, however, know that the Roman armies’ surgeons kept on hand a specialized tool for removing sling stones from the body of a legionary.
Fascinating!
Seeing how much we can learn from analysing these hypothetical scenarios, what about you check out the opposite side of the spectrum? What weapons a creature that is signficantly taller and stronger than a human would use?
A sling stone gathers such velocity there is little difference from firearms, chunking through plywood. Accuracy is a real issue, and you need space to spin it up. Sling-staffs seem to need less space to deploy (thus tighter grouping of staff-sling troops, more volleys per unit). I really liked your Zulu iklwa episode ( ruclips.net/video/vTJ7sVqiDX4/видео.html ) and it applies here, broken spear shafts shortened into a sword, because only the tip is important anyway. And Atlatl spear throwers can make javelin tossing much more effective at range.
At least early firearms. And I was thinking slings would be a favorite with the smaller lighter characters, not just because of effectiveness, but, it can be concealed easily and ammo is easily user producible. If you use lead and carry a mold you could simply get lead as you traveled saving you from having to carry around a large number of 1oz slugs. Clay can simply be molded by hand and set around the camp fire to bake.
I'm not sure spear throwers would work as well for smaller lighter fighters though. The reason for the thrower is to lengthen the length of the throw. So say a halfling using a spear thrower would at best be as good as a full sized human with much longer arms using javelins. It equalizes the throw a bit, but doesn't really give the smaller lighter humanoids an advantage.
One reason why Australian Aboriginal did not use bows is along with the throwing sear they used a launching stick called a womara they are not the only people to use a stick to help propel the light sear at increase speed and distance .😊
Pole arms would be good for guards standing at posts as the weight is resting on the ground. It only needs to be kept verticle which takes little effort.
I'm happy to hear you revisit this topic; I think you're spot on; weaker people would do massively better when there is little armour involved, since grappling/wresting and the weapons that favour strength become relatively more important; swords, spears and shields are the way to go for such people because they rely the least on physical power.
And in regards to ranged weapons: Powerful warbows (and even medium weight ones) are stronger than slings in their ability to both kill and damage armour but slings do have other advantages like being used effectively with a shield and being easy to carry alongside any other weapon; the reason classical literature seems to regard them so highly is probably a combition of people using weaker bows in those days and increased hand shock on the shield arm when hit with a bullet rather than an arrow. (the sling bullet transers the energy directly into the target instead of trying to pierce the shield, which causes a more abrupt transfer of energy and makes the hit feel more powerful)
28:34 concerning Armour you've to consider that the same kind of armour, due to the square cube law, weights even more for small people in relation to their own bodyweight.
Estwing 13oz lightweight geology pick. Even a under 10 spaghetti arms girl can put it through a cocunut, a car bonnet, and shark mesh. Nice t shank to deflect blows with if your hand eye coordination isn't as good as oponent. Also great for camping, roadside toilet digging, and geology!
Can be thrown and won't break when practising .. or possibly ever. Rock picks are built right.
Would also be very effective against the backs of the knees, the Achilles tendon (if available) and the instep if they didn't have armor on that part. Or the groin. Because I don't care if the bigguns' are wearing a codpiece over their private parts, that's still gonna hurt like hell.
I love that Matt is realistic that there are weapons that a small, weak person would prefer, but being bigger abd stronger helps with just about all weapons.
A sling would be a good range weapon. A light spear would be be a good pole arm. A light weight longsword would be good for a side arm. All of these allow a weaker person to maximize the force they can deliver.
"A child with a sword, very dangerous."
My brain this time of year.... "It's a sword, it's not supposed to be safe.... It's educational... "
That helm looks terrifying, I can imagine a full armoured Matt with that helm charging at me with a poleaxe... I'm going to have nightmares of that....
Mom: "Let me see what you have."
Kid: "A KNIFE!"
In regards to David and Goliath. Phonecia/Philstine helmets of time did not have nose bridge protection. Meaning a stone from a sling could hit the armored person between the eyes and would be highly effective.
staff slings, war darts, poisons, stick thrown spears/arrows/darts etc would all be excellent options, as would traps, caltrops, throwing crosses and more in close, especially backed with poison, would leverage that lesser strength to a vast degree
In testing, my 18c reenacting group found repro Commanche and Iroquoian bows did not penetrate three-ply bullhide Spanish adargas (shields). They did usually penetrate our deerhide cueras, but our cueras (tabards or jerkins) are not the full eight-ply called for in Spanish regulations, so the jury is still out there. So even in the gunpowder era these rules still apply.
A quartet of hobbits armed with spears would have scary unit cohesion, which in itself is a combat multiplier.
The only one I've heard of that didn't really get mentioned here is the atlatl, which a great tool for making those light throwing spears or darts Matt talked about into longer-ranged, higher-velocity weapons.
He mentioned the Australian Aborigines using thrown spears and not bows, but woomeras are a big part of that story as far as I know.
a low draw weight hunting bow is still quite deadly against unarmored opponents.
Atlatl and darts are also a very underrated and often forgotten missile weapon, and even more so if the dart had changable foreshafts.
imagine if you could armor halflings at one quarter the cost of armoring a human and they can fight twice as long in the armor, numbers and stamina might overwhelm strength and reach advantages.
Great video, very informative!
In Japan, the naginata was often considered to be a good weapon for women. Naginata took many forms, but generally was similar to a wakizashi mounted on a shaft 4-5ft long so that the total length of the weapon including blade was a bit taller than the user. It was certainly lighter than a pole axe, and the shaft gave the user more leverage and reach against larger opponents armed with swords.
i feel the need to point out the goedendag here as while it can still he used to deal percussive damage it was also a very effective thrusting weapon vs armor when handled by flemish foot soldiers
13:54 In the Dragonlance books/spinoff DnD setting, Kender, their version of Halflings, have a traditional weapon that is a sling on a staff which can be quite deadly.
"A child with a kitchen knife: very dangerous." As a former child, agreed.
#1: crossbow/sling
#2 mid-weight relatively short spear
#3: light shield and shortsword. You can be nimble with a shorter blade, use the cover of the shield and make a couple quick jabs and get out, and the shield means you don't have to directly parry blows of stronger oppenents.
My wife is 7 inches shorter than me and not very strong, but when we practice she does reasonably well with the "spear" but it has to be light and not much longer than she is tall.
Haven't watched yet.
My guess is: long pointy stick like weapon good. Heavy bow not good.
Piecing and edged weapons are probably better than blunt force weapons.
I wonder if slings would be an equaliser? I suspect the length of the sling could compensate for shorter limbs but most powerful person is still advantaged.
At about 30:30 you get to a great point. Our tiny hero must turn their supposed disadvantage into an advantage. Footwork and distance control are their most important weapons, and good tactical use of these will take down a larger opponent eventually. Our small hero must arm themselves accordingly. Light armor and an open faced helmet at most-cover only the most vital spots and maintain all-around vision. A buckler or targe paired with a nimble cut and thrust sword. Alternatively, a slashing spear or a bill depending on the details of our imaginary scene, backed up with a chopping weapon like a falchion, or with a good rondel dagger (this would depend on what the typical armor of the period is). Keep the enemy at bay, wind them or backpedal as needed, harry them as the opportunity arises, and let them tire themselves into submission.
Hot take:
Polearma and spears are not good weapons for dwarfs. They would be outreached anyway by…polearms and spears.
For such short but strong and heavy creatures, living in mountains and hills, a very good kit would be the late-republican legionary kit. Same with tactics: brutal head-on clash of infantry, with volleys of heavy throwing weapons followed by a swift and violent charge. Very dwarvish!
If we are considering the dwarves as similar strength or stronger than humans, with good stamina, I'd say the same. Short weapons, as much armor as possible, and aggressive tactics at close range.
Typical targets could be those often neglected when fighting humanoïds: kneecaps, hips, legs, thighs, either with short, beefy, stabby swords (gladius?), blunt weapons (warhammers, maces), or perhaps dagger? A small, stocky, low center-of-gravity dwarf might be able to wrestle, tackle and stab his opponent with relative ease (inside of the thigh, crotch).
23:48 Matt Easton, Schola Gladiatora, "I think, a child with an axe? Bad choice."
Thanks for all the info, Matt.
If I get kneecapped by a hobbit with a mace, that would probably be the end of my career as an adventurer.
I saw a hunter demonstrate that surprisingly little velocity was needed for an arrow to pierce through a deer's thorax (they demonstrated on a carcass). When ballistics gelatin is shot, it implies far more velocity is needed, though it seems this 'gel' is only good at simulating very small and very high velocity projectiles as the gel grips the greater surface area of the arrow in a way that it doesn't for a high velocity bullet.
This is especially the case if the point is really sharp, you just don't need a lot of momentum or kinetic energy for that to pierce through tissue.
Yeah, low velocity isn't good against armor but it's not hard to make armor that's resistant to even the most powerful warbows.
My little brother was really effective in small battles. He'd wait until the fight got going, then he'd sneak up and stab people. If he managed to get behind them, he could get two or three people before they realized what was happening. He would target people who had full face helmets because he was short enough to go below their effective field of view.
I love these for brainstorming. My biggest conundrum to-date is on how to balance, believably, armour in games. How do we give players the choice between full plate and lightly armoured kit, without greatly disadvantaging those without the plate armour? what would be a reasonable and realistic approach to this? centering it around economic restrictions seems not that great to engage with as a player in a fantasy/action game
A thought on the ax, maybe not a long battle chopper, but, maybe something like a Frankish throwing ax would be quite effective up close. I've seen them split shields, so even if you're wearing armor, its going to hurt. Especially if they clock your knee or your groin.
I know we shouldn't really quote movies but to prove a point, in Conan the Destroyer his little mate the thief has a dagger fixed to each wrist and his technique is to basically jump on someone and 'poke poke pokey' you do what you can to make it work btw Scott of Kentucky Ballistics put up a video....'are lawn darts lethal?' remember those 70_80s plumbata and he was being Really Serious trashed a ballistic gel torso
Any technique that involves a smaller, weaker assailant closing distance into grappling range of a physically superior combatant would be somewhat suicidal in reality.
It works in the movies, but it would only work in reality if the inferior attacker had a numbers advantage, and even then some of them would probably die.
There are no reasons why the bigger, stronger fighter wouldn’t have a dagger of his own and be perfectly happy to use it.
@ThatGuy182545 ah...but it was usually from behind
@@misolgit69Even that is pretty dangerous. If the other guy gets hands on somehow he got problems.
I gave my hobgoblin princess a flatbow and a saber with a nice looking yalman.
She uses leaf points for hunting and bodkins in combat. The bow isn't extremely powerful, but she targets the face and neck. A proper hit is devastating, but even a strike on the helmet is a real attention getter.
Small people have a bit of an advantage in cluttered terrain, able to take advantage of smaller gaps and cover. It may be that a shorter weapon, such as a short stabbing spear, might be more optimal for them than something with more reach because it will substantially increase their mobility in said environment. Not so great on the plains, but well handy in a tavern or cavern!
Would love to see a video on indigenous people's spears from around the world, used mostly for hunting,skirmishing and self-defense. Also about bows, Comanche bows tended to be over 50 pds slightly, made from osage orange wood and sinew. And Amazonian natives use poison arrows , with curare or bullet ant poison. And lastly, war darts are way under rated.
The combo of sling, bow and crossbow in a single battlefield unit would be effective as heck.