KazianG wrote:
Were there any real notable variations among swords, spears, etc.. built for different purposes/styles? The falcata, Akinakes, short sword and falx come to mind immediately from TFOB, but they are all covered under the same proficiency, more or less.
Not really, as far as I am informed. The weapons from TFoB you are mentioning are not so much specialized weapons but rather regional variations of the basic type “sword†– most of them did not exist alongside each other at the same time in the same geographical locale.
Also, it is worth noting that Bronze Age weapons were cast, not forged. It was therefore quite impossible to make long blades, and the majority of swords would be treated as either Akinakes or Broad Daggers; actual short swords should already be rare. If you’ve downloaded my pics, you’ll have found a depiction of the two so-called Swords of Nebra from about 1550 BC – fairly typical in their dimensions.
Anyhow, on the southern Balknas one could find the Machaira (i.e. Falcata), the Xyphos (i.e. a short sword with leaf-shaped thrusting blade) and both the one-handed and two-handed Rhomphaia (i.e. Falx and Rhomphia) as specialist designs alongside each other at the same time.
Axes were practically invariably hatchets, with two exceptions. The Egyptians were using a two-handed axe looking almost exactly like a short-hafted Kern Axe with the axe-head weighted with an additional lump of metal opposite the edge, to lend more power to a blow; one might use the stats of the Bhuj. And the Minoan Greeks had a double-headed axe, the
Labrys; it was almost certainly only a religious implement and not a weapon, but that need not keep you; the stats of the battle Axe, with a second blade in lieu of the back spike, might be useful.
Speaking about axes, if you are looking for regional differences I would say that sword dominated in the eastern Mediterranean, with maces and axes being extremely uncommon, whereas axes and maces dominated Mesopotamia, with swords being somewhat uncommon; Egypt had a decent mix of both. Spears were of course used everywhere.
Speaking of spears, I know of no specimen considerably taller than a human. The Short Spear seems the appropriate choice for most spears, and the and the VL reach of the Spear from TFoB should probably be reduced to merely L.
Bows were not very powerful; it’s probably best to use Short Bow stats. At least in Egypt, and maybe also in other locales, I don’t know, a throwing stick like the Cateia was in use, though more for hunting than for warfare. Other ranged weapons would of course be javelins, including Weaver’s Beam, and slings, but neither axes nor daggers/swords were really balanced to be thrown.
Maces were neither flanged nor spiked, their heads were usually spherical or near-spherical affairs of either stone or, more rarely, cast bronze.
The Scythians and similar steppe horsemen were using a rather slender-looking horseman’s pick; you might use the stats of the War Hammer, with blunt damage reduced by 1.
KazianG wrote:
How was the Khopesh actually used? It looks as though it would be a cross between a sword and an axe in usage.. but most have hooks and things that might catch a weapon, etc. I could also be reading too much into it though.
The reliable reconstruction drawings I’ve seen make the Khopesh clearly come down on the short sword side, though of course that of chopping short swords. As to how exactly they were used – I don’t know, and I think that nobody knows; its not the kind of thing the Egyptians would have left records of. But I can definitely see the Khopesh perform the Hook maneuver. I’d probaly stat it out like a Falcata, with
slightly less powerful swing and greater awkwardness and much reduced damage on the thrust, but with the ability to Hook and possibly a
slightly better DTN, due to its more slender and less tip-heavy blade that should therefore be slightly faster.
KazianG wrote:
Something I really want to do is preserve some of the flavor of the individual regions. If I can find enough variety, I'd like to do this in martial traditions/weapon selection/fighting styles as much as other cultural elements. I've no idea if there's any historical basis to the idea.. but I would really like to see Egyptian martial arts have a different feel to them than, say, someone from the more barbarous north, primitive pictish tribes, or the greeks.
Historically, there is very little to support great deals of regional variety. Records of the kind you are looking for don’t exactly abound for such early times, so research will get you nowhere – there is just no evidence. From what evidence ther is (almost invariably archeological and pictorial) variety was decent with armour and helmet styles and slight with weapons but appears nonexistent with unarmed styles. If you want to infuse weapon technology and martial arts with much regional unique flavour, you will have to add a lot to the bare bones of history. You will have to make up things yourself.
One method to infuse warfare technologies with variety would o course also be war chariots vs. proper (early) cavalry vs. only footmen, of course. Cultured areas would have chariots, less cultured only footmen, and the steppes of the southern Ukraine and Asia horsemen (starting somewhere in the latter half of the 2nd millennium BC).
KazianG wrote:
Any mythology I've overlooked about special metals, etc?
I guess you are aware of
Orichalcum. A metal mentioned by Pliny as a good bronze-alloy is not legendary but has a cool-sounding ancient name you might want to use:
Hepatizon. And then there is
Noric Iron, a kind of low-grade steel or high-grade iron from the eastern Alps; not exactly legendary and woefully misnamed by Wikipedia, but at least a special kind of metal, even though already very late for your period.
Edited to clear up a really embarrassing instance of dyslexia.