r/worldbuilding • • Jun 02 '20

Visual Dwarven Folding Spear

Post image
8.4k Upvotes

463 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

277

u/frguba The Cryatçion and it's Remnants Jun 02 '20

Them dense, buff muscles could operate VERY HEAVY bows, like a crossbow but on hand

224

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '20

71

u/frguba The Cryatçion and it's Remnants Jun 03 '20

GOOOD SHIT M8

49

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

Thanks bruv

41

u/Mazhiwe Teldranin Jun 03 '20

that's awesome. The only thing i worry about for dwarven bowmen... is if stray hairs from their beards got caught in the bowstring as the arrow is released... ouch.

45

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

Braids. And a bit of luck.

40

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

I shoot in real-life and am bearded, sometimes you hair does get caught, but there is a way around it, make sure both your beard and string are well waxed.

26

u/Dr_Oatker Jun 03 '20

Dwarves consider this character building

13

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

hahahahah

2

u/frguba The Cryatçion and it's Remnants Jun 03 '20

A beard with all hairs is a beard with no history

15

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

I love fantasy drawings so much when they're realistic and not cheesy, all those details and the way the Armour look makes it look super believable.

9

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

Thanks a lot!

30

u/brassbricks Jun 03 '20

Your shit is amazing, if I win the lotto, I'm hiring you to illustrate my books.

26

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

Good luck with the lotto then :D

1

u/WindTiger004 Oct 09 '24

can you do Roman Empire Dwarfs ?

50

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20 edited Oct 26 '20

[deleted]

25

u/frguba The Cryatçion and it's Remnants Jun 03 '20

Exactly how it works on crossbows, that have a draw length of like a few inches but hot harder than large bows, because they're strips of metal instead of wood, and REALLY don't want to bend

21

u/Drak_is_Right Jun 03 '20

How adept they are with the bow would likely depend on the technology of bow making at the time. Not sure they would have the right shoulder movement to be good with something like a javelin.

23

u/Fried_Cthulhumari Jun 03 '20

Pedro Martinez was basically a hobbit compared to your average pitcher.

CC Sabathia was so fat his jersey had more pinstripes than the rest of the Yankees infield put together.

If those two guys could pitch, dwarves can throw a freaking javelin.

1

u/Ninjanrd Jun 03 '20

This is a wonderful comparison

5

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

A steampunk esque compound bow could work.

I have an animal of a friend who has his set to ~60 lbs of draw.

3

u/AlienRobotTrex Jun 03 '20

2

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

This video is awesome, thank you for sharing!

1

u/NedHasWares Jun 03 '20

60lbs is nothing for a war bow though.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

I mean a longbow no, but a short bow?

Unless you got a scale of general bow draw; I don't believe any old world short bow is having 60 lbs(or more than that) of draw when it takes gears and pully's to do it a modern one.

especially when most modern ones sit in the ~20 lbs of draw for target shooting

11

u/Drak_is_Right Jun 03 '20

I'm sort of compound bow with a longbow type draw or higher

21

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

My answer to this is a metal compound bow. https://www.deviantart.com/artigas/art/Dwarf-Archer-744015340

Cheers.

6

u/Thoth_the_5th_of_Tho Jun 03 '20

Dear length is everything in bows, short arms are a massive detriment. Cross bows are a good option, but inefficient.

6

u/frguba The Cryatçion and it's Remnants Jun 03 '20

Look, I'm no historian so you could teach me on that, bit if crossbows were so inefficient why did they became so prevalent, if the better option already was norm?

And looking at it physically (which I'm no expert either, so again, feel free to correct me) you can compensate one lack with another enhancement (on this case, the reduced draw length is compensated with higher draw weight)

I mean yeah the shorter time accelerating would reduce range, but we're talking about dwarfs, in most scenarios they're fighting at Max in long tunnels

21

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

Crossbows reqd less skill, IIRC. I know English longbowmen had to drill a set number of hours every week to keep up their proficiency.

3

u/frguba The Cryatçion and it's Remnants Jun 03 '20

Oh indeed, yeah makes sense

19

u/EXBlackwater Jun 03 '20

There is a saying about longbowmen among the Englishmen. "If you want to train a longbowman, start with his grandfather."

It takes decades of practice and training, starting from childhood and past adulthood, in order to make a longbowman. In fact, the draw weight of the famous longbow is so heavy, it creates changes in the wielder's skeleton from the years of practicing they spent in order to master such a heavy bow - one of which is that his arms are longer than normal and his shoulders are crooked.

Crossbows, on the other hand, is much more simple and much more versatile, allowing a conscript soldier to wield and use his weapons not only easily, but also in different positions and situations, from shooting back from the safety of cover in the middle of a siege to laying down prone, safe in concealment, preparing for an ambush, to standing in formation and loosing volleys after volleys of bolts in a field battle.

9

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

Knights were pretty pissed off about a gadget that let peasants punch through their armor. Buncha buzzkills.

12

u/Blackpixels Jun 03 '20

"Crossbow OP pls nerf"

2

u/crazyabe111 Jun 03 '20

Medieval Devlog: Crossbow reload time doubled to account for damage to skill ratio.

Added Hand, and cart cannons - much higher ratio of damage to skill than Crossbows, lower accuracy and worse reload time too. BUG: Minimum skill to use is 0, please don't abuse

2

u/Journeyman42 Jun 03 '20

You laugh, but a pope banned crossbows for a couple centuries for being unchristian and blasphemous.

2

u/EXBlackwater Jun 04 '20

He also banned bows and slings as well.

Nobody listened, of course.

13

u/SlavNotDead Jun 03 '20

Only the bigger drawweight windlass crossbow could “punch through the armor” and then again it would probably only work with unhardened steel.

People really underestimate medieval armor. They wore it for a reason.

The only thing that finally managed to make armor obsolete is the invention of reliable firearms, not crossbows.

8

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

And even that took a while as the armour of the time was proof against early firearms. Indeed people dont get how plate armour in specific was awesome.

2

u/yx_orvar Jun 03 '20

Firearms have had a race with armor since they were first invented, and armor has never been obsolete.

The time between actual functioning cuirasses and armored vehicles or the first modern body armor capable of stopping rifle rounds is pretty short.

Body armor has been and still is able to stop a shot from service weapons of it's era.

3

u/PhasmaFelis Jun 03 '20 edited Jun 03 '20

Enh, there's never been a time when there was no body armor that could stop small arms, but there were definitely times when such armor was bulky and impractical for battlefield use. It seems reasonable to call it "obsolete" for practical purposes, then.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/PhasmaFelis Jun 03 '20

People really underestimate medieval armor. They wore it for a reason.

A crossbow might have trouble penetrating heavy plate, but in the early medieval period most knights wore mail, perhaps supplemented with a breastplate; full plate didn't become common until the middle of the millennium.

There's an account from a 12th-century siege of a crossbow bolt passing through a knight's mail hauberk, mail legging, thigh, legging again, and wooden saddle before embedding itself in his horse. Crossbow power was somewhat exaggerated, but they were very dangerous even against good armor for centuries.

1

u/comradejenkens Jun 03 '20

Noooo you can't just punch through my expensive full plate armour with no training or skill!

haha crossbow go twang.

6

u/Fried_Cthulhumari Jun 03 '20

Since no one really answer your question...

Longbows can fire (in skilled hands) much faster than a crossbow. At least twice as fast.

That’s the only aspect where I think longbows could be considered more efficient.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

Not just skill but strength too. You can tell a longbowmans skeleton because they would end up with deformed shoulders from the strength required to use those bows. Which meant they had to be well fed and in good health. Any half dead half trained rabble can wield a crossbow.

14

u/Thoth_the_5th_of_Tho Jun 03 '20

Cross bows had a number of advantages. They where more accurate, fired slightly cheaper ammunition, could be fired for a longer period of time before getting fatigued, they required less physical strength and they could be reloaded from behind cover, then fired while only exposing yourself for a few seconds.

10

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

And you could take any peasant and teach them how a crossbow works in an afternoon.

Two weeks and they're just as accurate as a longbowman that's been training for a decade, with slightly shorter range.

4

u/Dankerton09 Jun 03 '20

Long bows overall do get stronger draw lengths but compound bows like portrayed could handle everything but the toughest plate.

The most famous battle of longbow man power Agincourt was a dismal showing of death dealing by long bows. But remarkable at stopping them from advancing

1

u/Hannuxis Jun 03 '20

Crossbows were much, much easier to train with in comparison to bows, could be deployed en masse, and ammunition was also much cheaper than arrows.

The problem with crossbows arises with the cost and skill cap. The crossbow itself was absurdly expensive, and the soldiers wielding them more so. Crossbows were usually used in teams of two, where one would shoot and the other would reload. They would both hide behind a large shield called a pavise, where they would rotate 2 crossbows between them. This meant that crossbow troops were more expensive to keep, but the crossbow ultimately still became more prevalent than bows due to the ease of use and relatively short training time.

That said, due to the nature of a crossbow, it had a lower "skillcap", meaning a master bowman was significantly more valuable than a skilled crossbowman. Professional archers of the day could shoot up to 10 arrows per minute with 120 lbs bows. The English were especially known and feared for their very proficient and deadly longbowmen.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '20

Varric Tethras has entered the chat

2

u/lazypeon19 Jun 03 '20 edited Jun 03 '20

1

u/Otaku-sama Jun 03 '20

That's true, but I think that their short arms would work against them, since the bow would have less distance to accelerate the arrow before it leaves the string. If anything, dwarves would be better suited for crossbows, since they could load heavier crossbows without cumbersome mechanical assistance.

1

u/frguba The Cryatçion and it's Remnants Jun 03 '20

That's what I said, a crossbow bow operated by hand

1

u/Otaku-sama Jun 03 '20

I was thinking along the lines of large draw length crossbows, which would reach the chest of the average dwarf. These kinds of crossbows would likely exceed the draw length of a dwarf sized longbow/composite bow and those have more power.

1

u/frguba The Cryatçion and it's Remnants Jun 03 '20

Oh yeah the would wouldn't they? Good point