shardblade Do Shardblades provide a bonus versus Shardplate?

[CaptainRyan he/him]

Imagine that you, yes you little muggle/skaa/non-radiant etc., are standing in front of a suit of shardplate. You are given two weapons: 1) a shardblade and 2) a warhammer.

 

You take the shardblade and swing it repeatedly against the left vambrace of the shardplate until the vambrace shatters.

 

You then take the warhammer and swing it repeatedly against the right vambrace of the shardplate until the vambrace shatters.

 

Did it take the same number of swings or would the shardblade provide a bonus against shardplate?

 

 

*** edit ***: To be clear I do not mean a warhammer as in the massive weapons wielded by shardplate users but rather a one (or two) handed mace/hammer meant to be wielded by a regular soldier.

Edited April 4, 2016 by CaptainRyan

[baby he/him]

A warhammer dents faster, easier, basically inferior in every sense to a Shardblade. Blades are magically reinforced, easier to handle, as warhammers are designed for use by shardplate wearers.

[IndigoAjah he/him]

yes but would the Blade break the Plate in fewer swings? The Blade is a better weapon but does it actually break the Plate better per blow?

[baby he/him]

I would think it does from the reasons I listed.

[IndigoAjah he/him]

Those are reasons you might get more strikes in or that the weapon would last longer, but not that the Plate would break in fewer blows

[CaptainRyan he/him]

A warhammer dents faster, easier, basically inferior in every sense to a Shardblade. Blades are magically reinforced, easier to handle, as warhammers are designed for use by shardplate wearers.

 

So, to you, the damage inflicted on a piece of shardplate by a weapon is not completely related to the amount of force you bring to bear? 

[baby he/him]

I mean, if you can't lift the thing in the first place, it'd be harder to use it. To rephrase my answer, I'd say that if you had shardplate of your own, then the warhammer could do it in less swings. However, if you didn't, the shardblade would take less. 

[CaptainRyan he/him]

I mean, if you can't lift the thing in the first place, it'd be harder to use it. To rephrase my answer, I'd say that if you had shardplate of your own, then the warhammer could do it in less swings. However, if you didn't, the shardblade would take less. 

 

Ohhh, I see the confusion. Sorry, I will edit the original post to be more clear. By warhammer I simply meant a mace/hammer that a normal soldier would be equipped with; not the giant hammers used by shardbearers.

 

Would this information change your opinion at all?

[baby he/him]

Hum. Can't remember if we can talk about Words of Radiance here, but

if it was a spren formed warhammer, then yes. However, if it was just a plain hammer, I'd still go with the shardblade.

[CaptainRyan he/him]

Hum. Can't remember if we can talk about Words of Radiance here, but

if it was a spren formed warhammer, then yes. However, if it was just a plain hammer, I'd still go with the shardblade.

 

Ok. So, in your mind, shardblades provide a bonus against shardplate. Good to know. Thanks for answering!

 

Also, full disclosure, I too think shardblades (or perhaps all invested weapons) have a bonus against shardplate that normal weapons do not.

[IndigoAjah he/him]

Is this because the Investiture weakens the Armour's Investiture, attacking the Stormlight that holds the Plate together? In terms of simple physics it doesn't make sense, but the Stormlight does seem to create a layer of protection and hold the Plate together even when it shouldn't physically hold

[CaptainRyan he/him]

Is this because the Investiture weakens the Armour's Investiture, attacking the Stormlight that holds the Plate together? In terms of simple physics it doesn't make sense, but the Stormlight does seem to create a layer of protection and hold the Plate together even when it shouldn't physically hold

 

Great question and great hypothesis IndigoAjah. I think you might be on to something there. Perhaps in some realmatic way invested weapons are more capable of damaging invested armor.

[Argel he/him]

Does the Stormlight actually help hold the shardplate together though? We know given a decent amount of force that mundane weapons can break shard plate, so it doesn't seems like if Stormlight is helping to hold it together the threshold to bypass it is low. And shardplate without any Stormlight doesn't suddenly fall apart.

 

I think the theory is the opposite -- investiture vs. mundane.  In general in the Cosmere it seems that being Invested is better, so I would expect Invested vs. Invested to cancel each other out. So let's say there is some kind if of rating for how Invested something (IR = Investiture Rating?) , so let's say a shardblade is IR100 and the shardplate is IR20, then maybe the shardblade's effect is 100-20=IR80.  Not sure if that makes a shardblade worse than a battle hammer though.

 

Now, a different argument might be that since a shardblade (IIRC) cuts through all three realms, that it cuts off access to the Stormlight. Though we're back to whether Stormlight actually holds shardplate together, which I'm skeptical of. I think if it did do that then it would be much harder to break, and we wouldn't have a lengthy thread about bullets penetrating shardplate (or if we did, it might be how many can wear the Stormlight effect down).

 

It might be worth asking if a shardblade had an advantage over a heavily Invested hammer that doesn't have any special abilities (such as shardblades cutting through all three realms).

Edited April 4, 2016 by Argel

[SnopyDogy]

I don't believe that Shard blades themselves have and "bonus" vs shardplate due to investiture or anything like that. Instead, iirc every time we see blades doing significant damage to plate (more then we see mundane weapons doing) the wielder of the bald is wearing plate. So it is the attackers shardplate that is really doing the damage by allowing him to put a lot more force behind the blow then someone without shardplate would ever manage.

The one advantage shardbaldes have (and the reason why someone in plate would prefer it) is that no matter what you do to the blade it will not give or break, unlike mundane weapons. However this advantage is offset by the fact that the blade is a woeful weapon for dealing with plate armor, it just isn't designed for it. Given that shard plate has no gaps a fine piercing point on the blade would be no use (and no of the illustrations show) it is clear that shard blades were not designed to fight people in shard plate. What it is designed for is long sweeping cuts, taking advantage of the fact that it can cut through pretty much anything. i.e. it is a weapon optimized to fight people without plate that gets used against plat when required.

Plate armor, and sharplate would be no different, is optimized to turn and deflect bladed weapons. I suspect that someone without plate using a shard bald would have difficulty damaging the plate itself as many of his blows would simple be deflected away from the plate, meaning that very little force is actually transfer to the plate. This also makes the one definite advance of the blade (i.e. its indestructability) irrelevant.

Now the mundane War hammer/Mace is designed very specifically to fight someone in armor, especially plate. It delivers a large amount of "blunt" force to a small surface area using a form which minimize the chance of deflection. Against mundane plate armor the idea is that the blow would still hurt the person in armor, perhaps bruising or breaking bones. Against Shardplate which doesn't allow much if any force through to the wearer all the force imparted by these weapons would be transferred to the plate, causing more damage and encouraging failure. The only question is if the weapon can outlast the shardplate. I suspect that it will.

TL;DR I believe that the optimal design of the war hammer will, in the hands of an unassisted wielder, prove the better weapon for cracking open plate.

[natc]

Metal weapons would technically absorb some of the force of their own impacts due to malleability yes? Not a metals expert.

Shardblades are seemingly indestructible, so I would assume they are rigid.

[Argel he/him]

Metal weapons would technically absorb some of the force of their own impacts due to malleability yes? Not a metals expert.

Shardblades are seemingly indestructible, so I would assume they are rigid.

 

Then wouldn't that make recoil from hitting the shardplate a bigger problem for a shardblade (assuming no strength or dexterity boosts)?

 

I think there is still the question of the special cutting abilities of the shardblade -- does that give it any advantage?

[Yata he/him]

Now I take the problem from another direction amd just at the end I will expose my thought about.

 

I take the problem through the In-world knowledge:

If Shardblades doesn't offer any "bonus" VS Plate, in the area (unless you are a virtuos of the Blade like Adolin) everyone will use an hammer (or similar weapon), also a full Shardbearer have to prefer the use of similar weapon. But as far as we see any Full Shardbearer goes in duel with Shardblade (also guy without huge experience). This to me is quite an evidence (or at least a clue) in the "Shardblades have some kind of bonus aganist the Plates".

 

Now my thought about:

We know that a Shardblade cuts in Cognitive (not all three realm as far as I remember) and probably also if the Plate blocks it thanks to its Investiture, the Blade still "hurt" in some way (also minimal) the Cognitive Aspect of the Plate. As far as we saw that kind of damage are more "Stormlight needed" than the mondane damage to heal and this is probablythe reason of the "Shardblade bonus".

 

PS: As far as we know the Plate are very rigid object, they are hard like hell but quite not flexible, they sustain a lot damage but when the damage begin to be too much they shattered very quickly... It's like Investiture's powered Glass (or perfect cut Gemstone), therefore I find hard to define the outcome of something so hard to imagine and far from my direct experience   (have someone some pratical example of fragile object that became resilient with an outsider and constanct force ?)

[Master_Moridin he/him]

Now my thought about:

We know that a Shardblade cuts in Cognitive (not all three realm as far as I remember) and probably also if the Plate blocks it thanks to its Investiture, the Blade still "hurt" in some way (also minimal) the Cognitive Aspect of the Plate. As far as we saw that kind of damage are more "Stormlight needed" than the mondane damage to heal and this is probablythe reason of the "Shardblade bonus".

 

I swear there's a WoB where he says they cut in all three realms, but there's this

 

Pinpoint

If Hoid got beheaded, would his body grow a new head?

Brandon Sanderson

Yes.

Pinpoint

What if Hoid got cut by a shardblade?

Brandon Sanderson

The Shardblade cuts the soul and what Hoid does heals the soul.

(source)

 

So at the least Shardblades cut in the Spiritual and Physical

[Argel he/him]

Shardblades could be preferred for social/societal/cultural reasons. It's basically a way to flaunt status, money, etc.  Plus presumably most of the shardbearers probably train with the sword the most (i.e. use the weapon you are familiar with).  Think about reading/writing, the music, the arts, safehands, etc. all cultural things.

 

I think shardblades are cognitive realm but cut/damage all three, but I haven't had any luck tracking that WoB down (but I have read through some recent transcripts that I do not think are on here yet so harder to search). We know it does spiritual realm damage (see quote below) and obviously physical realm.

 

Pinpoint

What if Hoid got cut by a shardblade?

Brandon Sanderson

The Shardblade cuts the soul and what Hoid does heals the soul.

 

Have you read the thread about bullets doing damage to shardplate? There is some interesting discussion in there about kinitex energy/damage. Don't forget that arrows can damage shardplate and Kaladin even used his legs via lashing in the duel with Adolin (and of course one of the duelists used a hammer, and it was causing damage). It seems like shardplate was deisgned to protect against hits from shardblades, which are usually swords. I wonder what shardplate would look like if there were tons of shardhammers instead of shardblades?

[Dihatimus]

I think a full shardbearer will always use a shardblade in a duel because normal weapons will not be able to defend against them. So if the opponent has a hammer and you have a blade, then you have a decidedly higher advantage because he cannot parry with the hammer, it will be cut effortlessly, or he has a blade and you have a blade, because otherwise he would have the advantage.

 

In response to OP's question, I would say it depends possibly on the force you can bring to bear more then the type of weapon. Almost every instance of plate being broken quickly involved supernatural strength or speed at play with blade or without. Adolin in his duels, Szeth against everyone, Kaladin kicking rellis or Dalinar punching the king, pretty sure I remember the chasm fiend doing something during the botched hunt. I don't recall any instance where a non-enhanced Shardblade bearer broke shardplate to compare a mundane hammer to.

[Argel he/him]

Makes sense about normal weapons, but then why didn't Adolin take out that hammer in the duel in WoR? Just no opportunity?

 

I don't recall any instance where a non-enhanced Shardblade bearer broke shardplate to compare a mundane hammer to.

 

Nitpicking, but in the duel one of the shardplaters was using a warhammer, so was not shardbearer. It seems that it's the amount of force and how it is applied (e.g. bludgeoning vs. slashing/piercing). Shardplate obviously makes that easier. But I think the OP is asking if you were not  using shardplate, so no attribute boost, then how does a shardblade compare to a mundane hammer.

[CaptainRyan he/him]

 But I think the OP is asking if you were not  using shardplate, so no attribute boost, then how does a shardblade compare to a mundane hammer.

 

This is correct - I am wondering if shardplate is damaged only by the amount of force involved / how that force is applied or if shardplate, due to its magical nature, responds to damage differently depending on the invested nature of the weapon.

[Pathfinder]

 

I swear there's a WoB where he says they cut in all three realms, but there's this

 

 

So at the least Shardblades cut in the Spiritual and Physical

You are thinking of Nightblood. He cuts all three. 

[Yata he/him]

You are thinking of Nightblood. He cuts all three. 

I remember "A shardblade cuts in the Cognitive, Nightblood cuts all three realms".

 

But actually this may be meaningful or meaningles with realmatic... we see something of the Cognitive and in the Cognitive Realm is where body and soul are connected..therefore cuting in the Cognitive may damage the soul... but it's a bit complex.

 

About the "Shardplate VS bullet" I missed that topic, but I will try to recover ;-)

[Dihatimus]

Makes sense about normal weapons, but then why didn't Adolin take out that hammer in the duel in WoR? Just no opportunity?

 

 

Nitpicking, but in the duel one of the shardplaters was using a warhammer, so was not shardbearer. It seems that it's the amount of force and how it is applied (e.g. bludgeoning vs. slashing/piercing). Shardplate obviously makes that easier. But I think the OP is asking if you were not  using shardplate, so no attribute boost, then how does a shardblade compare to a mundane hammer.

 

Elit, yes, I remember that one, he had plate, did he ever hit Adolin with the hammer?

 

There simply is not enough data. There is too little unassisted blows to shardplate. In my mind, in order to compare shardblade verses hammer, I would need to eliminate the other variables. Since I do not recall reading about even one unassisted account of a shardblade damaging shardplate, I cannot determine if the damage was caused because of the shardblade or because of the strength. Furthermore, I only remember seeing the effects of many, many blows from unassisted mundane weapons on shardplate. 

 

Do I think that a shardblade has a bonus? From what I have seen no. Because I have not seen anyone damage shardplate with a shardblade alone. Based on too little evidence I could equally draw the conclusion that shardblades have a penalty, that would also likely be more appropriate thematically. I am reserving my right to change my mind once more data is available.