PDA

View Full Version : Poll: Tweak wardens "Guts then Chop" execution?



SerArthur-Dayne
04-15-2017, 12:42 PM
Just wanted to see if people would like to see the execution tweaked just a little. Heres a clip if you havent seen it, it starts at 0:50


https://youtu.be/GBEqRCUDOkM

In the execution, he stops his sword right at the enemies neck for a full second, and then decapitates them with no momentum.

I would like to see it tweaked so the warden does not stop his sword at the enemies neck, but rather has one clean & fast sweep where he decapitates his enemy using the swords inertia. Thoughts?

kweassa1917
04-15-2017, 02:37 PM
The thing is, the current motion is actually a better representation of... um... "real life dismemberment" -- because the human bone is actually pretty difficult to cut with a single swipe. In medieval Japan, prisoners of high profile who were to be executed -- whether were they granted "honorable" seppuku self-stabbing or plain decapitated -- were assigned swordsmen of very high profile as executioners who were highly regarded, respected, renowned for skill, and in possession of a superbly crafted blade to do the job in one clean stroke, and with the condemned kneeling perfectly skill to provide on ideal strike.

It's not unreasonable to see the Warden's execution move failing to clean-cut in just one stroke in the heat of battle, against a constantly moving target with some amount of armored protection -- while using a longsword that's combat-grade and built tougher than ceremonial standards. Tough, but not necessarily sharper.

His inertial motion of strike embeds the sword half-way through the opponent's neck but is momentarily stopped by whatever's left of the protection, neckbone, muscle -- and then at that point you can feel the strength he puts into the sword and heaves his way through the rest to finish the arc and finally chop the head off.

It is certainly not a "clean" and "pristine" strike for sure, but in turn shows power, gruesomeness and gritty reality -- so I'd actually prefer the current motion rather than a "cartoony" clean-swing chop-off that pops a head off like you were cutting straw posts . :)

Xinlyfenne
04-15-2017, 03:34 PM
Actually, I'd rather it took longer or they slowed down the animation, so it would count as a long execution and give back more hp.

DrExtrem
04-15-2017, 04:22 PM
Long swords were sharp enough to sever a femur without ease, if the strike was fast enough and the leg was not covered with armor.

A neck is far more fragile, than a femur. If we take armor into account, the wardens decapitation might be the most realistic display in the game. At least vs. armored fighters like other wardens, lawbri gers and conquerors.

The other heroes necks however should offer very little resistance.


But knights are considered crude by public perception.

kweassa1917
04-15-2017, 05:16 PM
Long swords were sharp enough to sever a femur without ease, if the strike was fast enough and the leg was not covered with armor.

A neck is far more fragile, than a femur. If we take armor into account, the wardens decapitation might be the most realistic display in the game. At least vs. armored fighters like other wardens, lawbri gers and conquerors.

The other heroes necks however should offer very little resistance.


But knights are considered crude by public perception.

Sorry, but its simply not true.

It's not about whether longswords weren't sharp enough, nor about public conception of knights. It's about how the human body is a lot stronger than most people think it is.

There's a reason why chopping heads off was considered a difficult task in reality, and relatives and friends of the condemned would beg, plead, and even pay money to executioners so they would decapitate with a single strike and send the person to his death with less pain. Executioners in the European middle ages even had a special sword designed to help with the job because it was a daunting task -- and despite all the preparation, it was not uncommon to see an execution failing to behead someone with a single strike, often requiring 2~3 additional swipes to separate the head from the body cleanly. Some executioners were even recorded down in history because he was not too good and required like 6~7 strikes to cut the head off.

It is true that sometimes executions were required on purpose to hit weakly, to inflict maximum pain until death. But aside from these brutal cases, there's still a substantial number of recorded people that were unlucky and suffered multiple strikes. For example:

- Mary, Queen of Scots: records differ from 2 to 3 strikes
- Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex: 3 strikes with an axe
- James Scot, Duke of Monmouth: 5 strikes + 1 knife (to cut off skin/leather that still attached the head to the body)
- Comte de Lally: 4 stikes with an axe
- Henri de Talleyrand-Perigord, Count of Chalais: 2 strikes with executioners sword + 34 strikes with dull-edged axe (yes, that's 34)

...and many more. If you take an interest in stories of medieval execution, almost ALL of them are horror stories of great suffering. There's a reason why the guillotine -- a device that guaranteed a single-shot decapitation -- was considered "humane".

Lay and set a singular femur in the perfect angle to cut it with a full overhead swing with max theoretical momentum, and of course you could crack it in half even with a blunt rod of steel, but encase it within 20 pounds of living flesh, complete with fat and sticky blood, on the constant movement at different angles and you aren't chopping off anything so easily in real life. Same with a head. Position a skull-neckbone wrapped in ballistics gel and set it at the perfect height for a 'decapitation strike' and it will go down not too hard, but against real humans, even in executions, the records are as written above.

In reality most of the heads collected as prizes or trophies were usually acquired AFTER the battle, as the victorious forces would gather the bodies and harvest them, or execute prisoners, but rarely during a battle.

It's just not that simple.

DrExtrem
04-15-2017, 05:32 PM
Archeological findings from mass graves show, that swords (especially longswords) were sharp enough to cut bones (even the femur).

Executioners swords and axes were no standard, because people did not care what happened to the delinquent. It was even good for the show, if the cut was not clean - executions = their reality TV.

Henry the VIII booked an executioner for his wife (can't remember which one), that was known to have a sharp blade, able to cut with one strike. This implies, that most executioners swords were not that sharp.