looking for a sharpness scale

[garrowolf]

I need some sort of sharpness scale to base penatration on for blades. Basically medieval swords would have a low rating, knives higher, katanas higher. Etc. I wanted to include obsidian, glass, different types of claws, and various other sharp objects for a table. I haven't found any scientific articles on the subject that were useful. Anyone have any ideas on here?

 

[Phototoxin]

It's mostly based on hardness (mohs scale 0=talc 10=diamond) and then the 'angle' of the blade so how it can apply the pressure (force / area) so if you imagine that the below 'diagrams' are the edges of blades the 2 is wider than the 1 and not as angled. Assuming they are of sufficient hardness not to dent or blunt too quickly then 1 is 'sharper'

*****__ ***
***_____**
**______*
2_______1

 

[garrowolf]

Well what I have at this point is this:
+0 herbivore teeth
+1 omnivore teeth, dull claws, dull blade
+2 spikes, spines, sharp claws, sharpned axe, most swords
+3 fangs, talons, shark teeth, knife blade, rapier
+4 very sharp blade, katana, razor, obsidian blade

Any corrections to this?

 

[garrowolf]

For instance I was debating with myself on if I should expand the too of the scale or not.

 

[garrowolf]

Top of the scale. Not too

 

[garrowolf]

I was thinking of also covering the limits of certain metals on this table. Ive heard that bronze is better than iron for holding an edge but not as good as steel. I was thinking of having iron limited to +1 and bronze limited to +2 or +3. Does that work with what people know?

 

[Dethklok]

Well what I have at this point is this:
+0 herbivore teeth
+1 omnivore teeth, dull claws, dull blade
+2 spikes, spines, sharp claws, sharpned axe, most swords
+3 fangs, talons, shark teeth, knife blade, rapier
+4 very sharp blade, katana, razor, obsidian blade

Any corrections to this?

I have a correction, yes. The Katana is made by folding, a method which was outmoded by the complex pattern welds used contemporaneously in Northern Europe. They are no sharper than other swords. There is, however, a mystique about the Katana that will continue to fascinate collectors, historians, and roleplay gamers for generations.

I was thinking of having iron limited to +1 and bronze limited to +2 or +3. Does that work with what people know?

Well... a blacksmith would usually work iron into a low grade steel through hammering. But cast iron weapons would probably be +1 to a +2 or +3 bronze. Bronze could hold an edge pretty well, though it was brittle.

 

[garrowolf]

Based on what blacksmiths have told me the folding of the katana was to compensate for poor quality iron available in Japan but that it was basically the same as Damascus steel. It was extremely sharp but it was brittle. Long swords were not sharp since they were used as a chopping weapon. Katanas were a slashing weapon. They would break if they were used as a chopping weapon. Short swords and knives were sharp, but not long swords. Any exceptional sharpness was wasted on a long sword.

One thing I am thinking about doing is expanding the scale to +6. Basically I am using this as a penetration system. I know that realistically the sharpness at the high end is brittle against plate mail. However I am trying to generalize enough for a lot of different weapons to work.

 

[Dethklok]

Based on what blacksmiths have told me the folding of the katana was to compensate for poor quality iron available in Japan but that it was basically the same as Damascus steel. It was extremely sharp but it was brittle.

Have you held a katana in your hands? By and large, the katana is rather thick. Wikipedia gives a good picture of cross sections; you can see the thickness here.



For all that, it's still sharp, and of course the curve makes it excellent for slicing through opponents. But it is not an especially sharp weapon.

Long swords were not sharp since they were used as a chopping weapon...

I don't believe you. The reason the guillotine was invented was because swords lost their edge after two or three beheadings. This is what happens to a sharp blade when it cuts through sinew and bone.

Any exceptional sharpness was wasted on a long sword.

Given the opportunity to fight with a dull or sharp broadsword, I would choose the latter every time.

 

[Meatboy]

@garrowolf

Sorry man I'm with Dethkolk on this one. There was little difference in ability of a western or eastern blade to hold an edge. Relatively speaking they more than likely lacked the technology to measure "sharpness" as we know it.

As for the long sword being a "hacking" weapon I'll let this fine gentleman talk about the finer points of sword use. (It's a good bit of info on sword and board fighting over all but what makes my point is aroud the 7:30 mark)

[video=youtube;dkhpqAGdZPc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkhpqAGdZPc&NR=1&feature=endscreen[/video]