Can anyone ID the sword and its length that was in the movie "Ironclad"...

>the money of plebs is the measure of merit
kys

Its a slightly oversize longsword. Nothing more. Just go to anybody selling real longswords, and ask for a sword made for somebody about a foot taller than you are. Job's done.

Would you pay to watch it?

Oakeshott XIIa

I mean there have been plenty of war movies about dudes that get shot down, sunk, or captured and have to survive despite incredible danger and horrible wounds, Could be a knight that gets hit by an arrow or otherwise wounded and left for dead when his companions are routed. The story would then follow as he tries to survive getting back home or something.

man, i totally feel you. Imagine a holly wood actually represented the crush of two shield walls clashing. I feel like it could easily be done in a way that it was exciting and appealing to audiences while still resembling some modicum of realism. I thought GoT did an okay, at the very least interesting take on this with that one battle at the end of season 6.

The Netflix series The Last Kingdom has a few battles with shield wall clashes in them. Realistic army numbers too; most fights are between 50-100 men a side and the big fights are less than a thousand per side, save one huge fight that's like 2k per side. It's not a bad show but you can telly they're going for "British Historical Game of Thrones" with it.

Come on, don't be so petty. When was the last time that a movie about a modern war depicted what was going on faithfully? Some things just work better for an action movie, or just a fictional work in general, than what would realistically happen. Because sometimes realism doesn't make for a good story - everyone laughs about how enemy soldiers in movies have horrible aim, but would it really be a good movie if the plucky hero got turned into swiss cheese in the first scene? In a TTRPG, wouldn't you complain if your characters died straight off to something that felt bullshit, instead of fun?

>but user, that has nothing to do with an unrealistic fight scene
Look, almost chopping a guy in half might not be realistic, but it makes that main character look epic - and with that kind of story, people want the heroes to seem somehow a little larger than life. A guy in armor getting pummeled to death only feels good if we feel the death is somehow either justified (he was a villain, he deserves a slow death) or tragic (such a good character doesn't deserve such a fate).

There's a quote from a book I can't remember about plays, where while it might be realistic for the main character to get run over by a bulldozer at random in the second act - that can happen in real life - that would make for a dissatisfied audience. They would want the bulldozer death to have some sort of meaning, or even for the fact that they died by bulldozer to somehow be their fault.

>Look, almost chopping a guy in half might not be realistic, but it makes that main character look epic
Not really. I know that stories and reality don't always mesh, but that scene just looks fucking silly and is only there so awkward teenagers can feel it's totally EPIK and BRUTAL. Even when assuming entertainment value trumps realism, there are better was to show off how strong the main character is.

I'd say that in terms of sillyness trying to pass for coolness, this is on par with the skateboard surfing scene in TTT.

*shield surfing

>fugg and I thought weaboo katana faggotry was bad.
"Deus Vult" is basically the next generation of that

idk man, i just felt like the show fell apart after episode 3. It went from all the characters to being believable to all the characters being pants on head retarded

The gif isn't even that unrealistic. It's a two handed overhead swing from movement. The most unbelievable part of the gif is the axe shaft.

But try to think about what the scene itself is showing - this guy is better than all the others at fighting, you can't stop him or even block his blows - even when he's killing that character, he's managing to chop off another's hand at the same time! It's not just that he's strong, it's that he's supposed to be experienced and more skilled at fighting than those mooks, even against incredible odds.

It's more like Batman somehow fighting three guys at once with only a few kicks and a tossed batarang, than someone trying to convince me that it's BRUTALLY EPIK. The shield-surfing scene in The Two Towers was out of place because it jarred with the rest of the tone of the movie and the seriousness of the Helm's Deep battle, but this movie doesn't have that jarring factor with this scene.

Curiously, that gif and the fuckhuge sword made me think of golden age arc guts

It'd just be a "two-handed long sword", nothing otherwise special about it besides the length.

Too thin to be classed as any of the swords that ARE that length, too long for an entirely "normal" "long sword".

Actually that'd work, have two soldiers wounded in a ditch with a greater battle just out of view, maybe they're from opposite sides of the battle but neither is strong enough to fight any more and are just waiting to die, maybe holding out to see whose side wins the battle.

And they get to talking.

90 minutes, character driven thing, low ass budget, rakes in awards though.

Last Kingdom was made by the BBC. It's also absolutely awful in terms of historical accuracy; the shield wall segments are mindbogglingly stupid.

Title sequence is pretty though.

>Can anyone ID the sword and its length that was in the movie "Ironclad"?
Yes, it's called a "prop"

I could see that going well as oscar bait dying introspection, or if they had flashbacks to earlier action that he survived during that introspection.

If swords were that good people would cut their way through castle walls pleb

That could almost be like a medieval Rambo or Die Hard.

It's superficially similar to a montante. The quillons on the guard are a bit short, but here's a picture of one with a human-sized human for scale.

Were these swords ever used during the Crusades or only long after?

It's a shame. I really like those books.

>medieval diehard

During the middle ages, knights used to tell such stories at each other for laughs, known as gabs (probable ancestor of gags); stuff like cutting the man and his horse in half with a single swing, or slaying five guys with a single sword trust. One saracen book tells of a spy that overheard such stories and took them at face value, making horrified reports at the sultan.

>title
I guess the knight is St Georges, then?

I had seen in a castle, belonging to a French noble family, a picture/gravure where a Templar cut a Sarasin in half pretty much like in this movie. Exageration has always been part of storytelling.

>"My sword is so big, it cut a man and his sword in half!"
>"My sword is so big, it cut five men in half at once"
>"Well, my sword is so big the pope tried to ban it!"
>"My sword is so fucking massive, I once stabbed a sultan in Spain and his unborn sun in Tunis at the same time!"
>Three days later, Jerusalem surrenders without so much as a single stone being thrown

I recall there being a story of some polish knight whose goal it was to chop off three heads in a single swing of his two handed sword.

As I recall he never managed it, but he did get two heads in a row a few times.

Of course, the guy might just be fictional but who knows.

It's a solid slab of steel with quite a lot of weight behind it. The guy wielding it seems very fit, runs up to his target and uses maximal force by using both hands in an overhead swing. The dude he is chopping up seems to be wearing leather and furs. It's feasible if unlikely to make that cut.

youtu.be/TbHjEK3Fc78?t=170

Here you can see a pudgy, middle aged man cutting through a whole pig standing still. Humans are squishy.

>Humans are squishy
Which is why they spent literally millennia strapping cloth, leather, wood, iron and steel to their bodies to make themselves less squishy. I can't recall the video (maybe someone else can find it), but there's one of this British guy firing a longbow at a pig's body (going straight through the body) and then firing at a pig's body wrapped in gambeson (it doesn't even penetrate the gambeson).

You're not going to fucking cut through chainmail, otherwise nobody would've worn it. Why weigh yourself down with something that does fucking nothing? Hell, you're not even going to cut through a wooden shaft. Dent it severely, sure, but you're not cutting through it with one blow.

The guy getting cut isn't wearing chainmail though.

>And they get to talking.

You mean like Enemy Mine? Or the Jap/American version it was based off? Honestly not a bad idea if it's done decently. I've seen it done a few times in various shows too and I've found it really cool.

>Psht. Nothing personel, pig.

That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Bastard Sword" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.

Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.

Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.

Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.

So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas:

(One-Handed Exotic Weapon)
1d12 Damage
19-20 x4 Crit
+2 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork

(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon)
2d10 Damage
17-20 x4 Crit
+5 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork

Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think?

tl;dr = Katanas need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.

You mean Podbipięta from Sienkiewicz's "Ogniem i mieczem"?

>Doc, what are you doing in Poland?!
>We have to save the mustaches, Marty!

That sword did not exist in this time period. It did not appear until late middle ages.

Veeky Forums's "realism" wankers strike again. Can't go a fucking thread without sperging out over what they think is real and how anything that doesn't fit is shit. Fuck off. Nobody asked. Go back to Veeky Forums and /pol/.

You sure seem mad.

Except someone did ask if it was used during that time period Rickey Retardo.

And that person wasn't the OP, Freddy Faggot. People were taking time out of their surely busy days to shit on the sword before that was ever asked.

>your full plate armor now becoming your worst enemy as peasants use long daggers to stab into the chinks of your armor over and over again.
As opposed to not being armored at all and having peasants stab you with long daggers?

What's the source on this manga/manwa again? I remember reading it, it was about a guy whose touch caused orgasms.

Well, they can't be expected to ID the sword if it's an unrealistic prop.

The OP stated it was from a movie and he was looking for replicas. There was no reason to assume it was a real sword.

I'm saying it "pod-bih-pyeta" and "senk-o-vitch"

How close am I?

In the story he vowed to remain pure until he cuts three heads in one swing (just like his ancestor did in Grunwald Battle).
He did it, but then the Cossacks pincushioned him with arrows and crossed.

True. Most movies with a decent budget make their own swords, tho.

Look up "sweet guy doujinshi" it's finished now. The gap material is great but the plot is also top notch. Good read

Good post.

It's more "syen-kyeh-vich".

At least it's better than Vikings.

bretty good, also checked
it's more like pod-bee-pyenta and senk-yeh-vitch

If they weren't wearing armor they could easily get up and dodge those close range stab attacks.

...

youtube.com/watch?v=CtMMY-QqRYQ

were you under the mistaken impression that we watch fictional stories for the sake of realism? we don't care much about realism that's why we have cars that explode when shot at.

well, your opinion surely isn't either.

>And that person wasn't the OP
Who cares? OP isn't the only person in this thread, other people are allowed to ask related questions you mongoloid.

Nah, it's basically cryptofascist code

Although there is a strange amount of overlap between anime weebs and nazis

>le turtle meme
knights can run, jump, climb, and somersault in armor. If you can do it out of armor, you can do it in armor.
If you have no armor they can stab you in the heart or slit your throat, and you die quickly and comparatively painlessly. If you have armor, they can't get to your chest or neck, so they stab wherever they can, and that makes death much slower and more painful.

Have a (you)

Looks kind of like a claymore, but the hilt and guard tells me that it's just a really big longsword.

That's already been made

Oh shit, that's what those are called?

I've been trying to find out forever. I love the aesthetic that the extended grip combined with the long, thin blade provides. I have an NPC who uses one in my campaign, but now I can actually name it rather than describing it.

Looks like a type XIIIa to me.

Higher res pic of OP's picture. Was it normal to wear leather armor over the chainmail he was already wearing? Seems excessively heavy

>leather armor
You have no idea what you're talking about.

>That battle in Germany where all the Forest-Niggers forgot to bring greaves to the battle and archaeologists uncovered a mass grave of them several hundred years later, only to find over a third of the barbarians had deep cuts and splits in their shin bones, some of them with even more than one wound on the same shin

Imagine you're some big tough G*rman, barbarian piling up against a formation of these pussy-ass Roman legionaries. You think the battle's won, because you clearly have the stronger men, and you're clearly much more blood-thirsty then they are. As you get closer and closer to the frontlines, for some reason, all you can hear is screaming and people shouting at each other to retreat and begging for mercy in your barbarian fucking tongue. Suddenly, you're close enough to the front to see what's happening. The Romans are hacking at your shins like they're felling a forest of human trees. Strong, burly men that you've seen growing up, eating dirt and taking names, just falling to the ground holding their shins and crying in pain. Some of them get their shins broken in, but keep standing, refusing to show weakness, until the merciless Roman soldier just reaches over and hacks at the same shin bone again, forcing the barbarian to break his big-boy facade and hunch over, screaming. You realize it's a fucking massacre. You try to run back, but the people behind you are pushing you in; your own countrymen have no idea what horrors lie in wait for them. They keep pushing you in to the slaughter, while you beg them to back up so you can escape from the horror. Several hundred years later, someone uncovers your bleached skeleton and finds you died as several spears repeatedly jabbed you to death while you lay, clutching your broken shins on the forest floor.

Yes, long drawn-out deaths of combatants is totally not a thing in films of this genre.

Its just a big fuckoff longsword/greatsword. The really weird part is that such weapons did not really exist at the time, other than maybe the progenitors to later Claymores, but they were likely not that big either.

That said, who fucking knows. This guy might be some highly, highly specialized fighter who taught himself how to use an exotic weapon, but his absolute refusal to wear a helmet or shield just makes me think he's an aspie knight.

Brigandine, those plately sections hold metal plates. Kinda weird looking version, but definitely what they were going for.

>You will never be a Roman legionaire, cutting down G*rmans until they whimper before you in fear
>You will never take them prisoner, lock their women and children into their houses and force them to watch their loved ones burn to death
>You will never anally rape them on the ashes of their offspring to hammer home their subjugation
>Caesar will never reward you with a piece of prime German land which your Germanic rapeslaves will till for you, too mentally broken to even consider resistance

>but his absolute refusal to wear a helmet or shield
>helmet
I get why that's done, so the audience can recognize the protagonists, but why don't more directors just take inspiration from reality in this? In real life prominent knights wore helmets because they weren't retarded, but decorated their helmets and armor in such a way that anyone could tell who they were even from a massive distance. Shit could get pretty ridiculous at times, but for Hollywood purposes that's probably what you want. If you expect them to recognize a certain character by his face, you can pretty reliably expect them to also associate his face with the giant fucking fish on his helmet.

I just like paladins and knights templar are generally considered the closest thing in the real world. Chill out dude.

>Nah, it's basically cryptofascist code

This straight up sounds like paranoid conspiracy shit.

Yes and no. But mostly no.

Yes in the sense that the leather is a dodgy attempt at representing a brigandine. Coats-of-plates and later brigandines were worn over mail on the torso for extra protection during the mid-13th and 14thC, until breastplates were adopted. This along with plate arm and leg defences layered over mail was the standard load-out of a 14thC knight. Heavy but still quite functional.

No in the sense that it would not have been worn during the siege of Rochester Castle, and his costume like the movie in general is pretty crap.

That's just a coat of plates covered in leather. Mind you that should have been what the Danes were wearing, minus the stupid "obvious bad guy" black fur and jackets.

Well he did wear full armor when he charged on his horse, using a flail.

>but why don't more directors just take inspiration from reality in this?
A lot of actor's contract's require a certain amount of "face time." It's stupid but it's why big name actor like Stallone had to have his helmet off in Judge Dredd.

The remake was specifically looking for a b-list actor who wouldn't force a face time clause. They were lucky to find Karl Urban who was such a big fan of the comics he'd refuse to do the movie if they showed his face.

Yeah, it'd be nice if they gave more heroes distinctive helms. Plus, you can always just have it get knocked off when he needs to emote while something important happens.

This. We've even been shown that it works.

>Audience could instantly tell Gladiator was Gladiator by that spiked helmet thing he wore
>Audience could immediately tell Lord Humongous was Lord Humongous because his costume designer knew what the fug he was doing
>Robert Baratheon had a big ole' fucking set of antlers superglued to his helmet so everyone could know who the hell he was

It's not like this is some scary, unexplored territory. Hollywood has done it before, often without too much negative incident. Only times it's really backfired is when the actor or actress whines about how they're not getting enough face-time or something; which is kinda-sorta understandable, I guess.

This dumb faggot thinks watching Deadliest Warrior is research.

>>Audience could instantly tell Gladiator was Gladiator by that spiked helmet thing he wore
He wore it for once scene, it covered only half his face and he took it off before the scene was over to deliver a dramatic monologue with his full face exposed.
>>Audience could immediately tell Lord Humongous was Lord Humongous because his costume designer knew what the fug he was doing
He was a villain whose look was defined by his hockey mask. Similar to Jason Voorhees. Or Micheal Meyers' William Shatner mask.
>>Robert Baratheon had a big ole' fucking set of antlers superglued to his helmet so everyone could know who the hell he was
We never once see Mark Addy wear the damn thing. The only helm with a distinct look from the books to get some air time was Sandor Glegane's hound helm. Which he wears all of twice before never being seen again.

It's been done: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Man's_Land_(2001_film)

Warning, though: it's about the Yugoslav Civil War, so don't expect a happy ending. An allegorical one, perhaps, but not a happy one.

It's a fucked up movie, though it's made for Balkan viewers, so expect it being hard to watch. Yugo movies have inside jokes and pacing that doesn't translate good to Western culture. I'd also suggest pretty village pretty flame and anything else concerning the war, they are grim, sad movies. Wounds, the movie is also fucked up, it follows the civilian/smuggler/criminal side of the war.

>yfw when you will never be dumb enough to mix up the battle of Visby with some Veeky Forums LARP

I don't think that was it, you memelord. Also, cut me some slack. I read about it 5 years ago on /tv/ of all places.

Just looked it up. Fuck you, you might be right. Go suck a dick.

No, he's right. It's used because it reminds people of some conservative past when Euros were cool and also they BTFO the mudslimes. That's not exactly a hidden thing, and you must be ignoring it if you think it doesn't happen.