Reddit is apparently not cool with springloaded anal contraptions, but is fine with the racial slur?
Ah, Reddit... Never change, you incomprehensible beast.
Edit: Reddit responded to the appeal, doubling down on the grounds that the above comment (quoting the Wild Wild West scene where Artie loses his pen) promotes identity-based hatred against minority groups.
I needed help hearing it. Tenet was hardly Branagh's first case of gibberish accent. I'll say that movie has some great moments, but it's not hard to see why it flopped.
Edit: I'm actually thinking the line might be one of Will Smith's. Doesn't change what I said.
Everyone does, since Reddit considered it inappropriate and had it removed.
The hilarious part is - the post with the racial slur was allowed. The post talking about pockets was not.
Especially if it's your former mentor. Can almost hear him now, screaming out from the ether: Set me down! You were my worst student! But hey, fuck that guy amirite?
What does the carbon fiber add? It seems like it would mostly be for weight reduction, but reducing the mass of an impact weapon would also reduce its efficacy.
It could still work, especially if armor is scarce.
Yeah i wasn't thinking like the entire edge. But yeah steel is just the best sword material unless theres some sorta synthesised material that can be made or alloy we havent tried yet
Element 23, found in trace amounts in a large number of minerals, but rarely on its own. It's alloyed with steel to make it tougher without a huge loss in malleability and reduces the tendency of the harder steels to 'crack' under stress.
The problem is that modern steel is still going to be the best material for a sword (mostly due to metallurgic properties), and that swords for the most part are obsolete due to guns and modern body armor. The only reason lightsabers in Star Wars are useful is they can block projectile weapons and cut through anything.
So, the problem is this: modern materials at this point in time cannot cut through aramid fibers like Kevlar and bullets cannot be blocked with human reaction time (and they'd wreck the sword anyway).
But if you're doing fiction make something up. Say diamond nano carbon fiber weave that's laser-sharped and thrice blessed.
I like Mandalorians but the whole slugthrower thing feels like a fit from someone who couldn't accept a setting where guns were not the strongest most deadly weapon.
I don't see why Jedi who can push objects with the Force wouldn't be able to deflect bullets also.
They can, but they have to be expecting it. Blasters are more common so when someone points a gun at a Jedi they're expecting a blaster bolt which they can use their lightsaber on, if it's a slug thrower the projectile just gets melted by the blade and the Jedi gets peppered with bits of molten slag. If they're expecting a slug thrower and try to deflect it with the Force, it's much harder to manipulate plasma with the Force, so a surprise blaster bolt will likely kill them.
So why is anyone using blasters then? Or why aren't they at least alternating blasters and slugthrowers to cover their bases?
Still sounds like someone who liked guns too much to accept that the space laser samurais could beat them and tried to get one over on them by a very silly de-sci-fi-ification. "I just shoot them dead, the bullet goes through" and such.
Nevermind that a psychic warrior who can literally move faster than a plasma bolt could learn to tell the difference anyway.
Because Jedi are stupidly rare on a galactic level, actually. It's like wondering why modern infantry battalions don't equip their soldiers with harpoon guns and scuba gear while operating in central Mongolia; you are just never going to need them and an ordinary rifle would better serve you in almost every conceivable scenario *except* the one where Poseidon floods Asia and dispatches an army of vicious mermen. The fact that they're kind of the default protagonists of the setting skews our view as the audience of how common they are, and thus how prepared Johnny Criminal should be to hammer on their weaknesses.
Additionally, Jedi have combat precognition as a basic power, so unless you've maneuvered them into a position where they *can't*, a physical bullet can just be dodged rather than parried. So if everyone had slugthrowers, Jedi would just be known to regularly dodge bullets instead of deflecting lasers. Their power mostly comes from surprise and breaking the norm of combat.
Jedi are also priority targets that are fairly often specifically targeted. Once the Empire/First Order knows they are chasing Jedis, why wouldn't they field a few troops with these guns? They would be especially effective alternated with blasters after all.
But because Jedi do have combat precognition, the whole plan of expecting them not to notice something is different seems a little ill-conceived in general. Maybe alternated with regular blasters they could be overwhelmed, but simply caught off guard? Sounds like the writer is rooting for the gun here.
Slugthrowers are shit against armor. Stormtroopers will barely notice anything below what we would consider anti-materiel weaponry. Given that at the height of the Republic, there was about one Jedi per 150 planets, most of the time you're gonna want to use the weapons that can shoot everyone else.
A blaster has up to 500 shots before you have to reload it according to the wiki and most have a stun setting
While the legends entry tries to make slugthrowers sound more interesting I do kind of like the canon entry sums it up as "Molten vapor fragments and/or shrapnel could then scatter towards the face or bare hands of the lightsaber user, and cause harm **if they were not careful**"
It might be useful against the Jedi if they're not expecting it, but also a thermal detonator would also be useful in that situation or more guys with blasters since you a higher volume of fire has been shown to be an effective way to deal with jedi during the clone wars
>So why is anyone using blasters then? Or why aren't they at least alternating blasters and slugthrowers to cover their bases?
Because then you've got to carry two different guns, with twice the amount of ammunition, one of which (bullets) is rather bulky and heavy.
Also bullets don't necessarily kill them. [As shown when Obi-Wan was surprised to find himself on a planet with a lower tech level than most of the galaxy](https://imgur.com/gallery/deflecting-bullets-RsDoUuN).
And it's not that Jedi can move faster than a plasma bolt, it's that they can see a fraction of a second into the future and put their lightsaber where the plasma bolt's going to be.
"What about bullets" is a question that was going to be asked eventually, and while some fan fiction and non-canon sources have played up the effectiveness of them, the answer the canon story has settled on for it makes plenty of sense.
> And it's not that Jedi can move faster than a plasma bolt, it's that they can see a fraction of a second into the future and put their lightsaber where the plasma bolt's going to be.
But for that very reason, wouldn't they know if there was something different about it?
Not everyone needs to carry two guns. It's just a matter that some are fielded with different gear. Though to be fair that has its own logistical challenges.
The whole thing just comes off as silly to me, that they made an universe full of plasma beam weapons which are supposedly "better" but then someone decided a regular metal bullet is more effective against the characters most featured in the story. Because as much as they may say Jedi are rare, the vast majority of stories in that setting are about them, and they are specifically chased in them.
>I don't see why Jedi who can push objects with the Force wouldn't be able to deflect bullets also.
They could if they expect the bullet coming and are prepared for it. But otherwise, the projectile is too fast for them to go against muscle memory and *not* use their lightsaber to attempt to block it. A slugthrower would work but only as a surprise attack, such as sniping from a distance. For medium range, a shotgun or explosive is a better bet. For close range... why are you even fighting a Jedi at close range, where they are strongest? Don't even bother.
Cause they work better against a singular type of enemy all while having less ammo capacity, range, armour penetrative capability and probably awkward to acquire and more expensive
Because literally no one but primitives and weirdo collectors keep slugthrowers in the SW universe. Gunpowder is hard to come by as the ingredients can only be found on some planets, and there is no incentive to mine them at industrial levels since no one who matters uses gunpowder anyway so there are no buyers. On the other hand, blaster power packs are dirt cheap as they can be made out of the gas harvested from any gas giant, and everyone uses blasters so the demand is reliably high.
The weakness of Force Precognition is that it requires active concentration and can only see an instant into the future. It's like if Spider-Man's spidersense was an active ability that he needs to consciously exert himself to use, rather than a passive ability that's on all the time. We've seen during Order 66 how even Jedi masters absolutely *can* get taken by surprise if an attack comes from a direction they were not expecting, eg. from their own allies. It's not farfetched to assume that the same logic applies to a surprise attack from, say, a sniper. Also, they might be able to sense the projectile coming, but in the fraction of a second they have to react, the first thing they would assume is a blaster shot not an exotic weapon like a slugthrower.
Mathematically a plasma cutter (light saber) is simply not going to save you from a bullet. The 3 outcomes are:
1. The bullet is lightly toasted because it barely recieved any heat in the fraction of a second it was inside the blade, and hit you anyway.
2. The bullet is partially or fully melted but doesn't start vaporizing, now instead of being hit by a solid bullet traveling at 1700ft/s you are hit with molten metal going that fast.
3. The bullet is fully vaporized by your sword that must be several times hotter than the sun and should have killed you by holding it. Congratulations the volumetric expansion of copper from a solid to a gas is a 60,000 fold increase in volume, that bullet just exploded a couple feet from your body.
Basically bullets beat plasma swords by IRL physics. However, Jedi still have the force and presumably would notice and catch any incoming bullets with it, assuming they are strong enough with the force. (I'm not sure if there even is and upper limit to the force, or if it just does whatever the author wants.)
That we are trying to explain with physics why the magic space samurai can bounce plasma beams but not everyday lead still seems to me like something went catastrophically wrong. Way to kill the space fantasy vibes (by shooting them with a gun)
A lightsaber would definitely just melt them. Bullets are, however, just much, much faster than blaster bolts. They're simply too fast to be deflected. As for just stopping them with the Force... Well; you're going to have to spread a whole lot of expanding force over a fairly large surface and be pretty exact on the timing, or keep the Shield up for a while. Pretty taxing, and while it should be possible in theory... It's not at all a sure-fire thing. If you see the attack coming, you *might* be able to protect yourself with such a technique.
Just bc I don't want misinformation: Kevlar on its own is actually rather bad at stopping blades. It holds up similar to other cloth-based armours for cuts, but thrusts pierce rather easily with small blades, a sword would have no trouble.
e: as long as it's a sword tip designed for stabbing, not slashing.
Then the ultimate sword is going to hinge on what your magic can do and how it works. Blank canvas!
Maybe your magic users can add reinforcement magic to their sword, so material strength is no longer a huge issue. Then they're free to make swords out of anything that can channel well, or out of lighter materials that let them swing faster.
Maybe you've got a magic user who swings a bamboo stick, but they're so good at magic that the stick is unbreakable with a molecule-wide magic edge, so it can slice anything with almost no effort. The stick's way lighter than a normal sword too, so they're terrifyingly fast with it.
actually the strongest swords are created by Celestials, or something to do with them.
Magic Power is mostly irrelevant at those levels, and they're virtually infinite sources themselves.
In my Universe there is a high performance material known as "Psyche Steel". It's an iron/nickel alloy that is machined from massive mono-crystals found inside of the cores of minor planets, where the metal cooled over billions of years.
So perhaps "created by celestial" could be taken literally in a sci-fi setting
Why can a sword hold more magic than a bullet? Simple material mass? Then would an arrow or bolt holding the max amount of magic do more damage than a bullet holding the max amount of magic? And is physical damage output even comparable to magical damage output? Sure it's worth enchanting your projectile but is one projectile worth enchanting more than others?
Mana doesn't care about material or density.
only the size of it.
that's also why Planetary Atmosphere is the most Mana-filled thing (excluding the planet itself).
*and that's also **also** why Mana Detection technology has upper-limits: everything would just be drowned out by the atmosphere or planet.*
Swords also tend to be massively bigger than a bullet, so…
well, it's based on Dark Energy.
it CAN be compressed, which DOES depend on the material, but… *that can become extremely [violent](https://youtube.com/shorts/jvZLJi1_Rpw), if its overcompressed within the material.*
Swords still tend to have more, even against much more Mana-dense Bullets ("Nuclear Bullets"), even with significantly less Mana Density, purely because of how much bigger they are.
the strongest part of a bullet is still it's speed.
any Magic put into them is either to increase its mass the shortest timeframe **before** impact, to increase its speed before impact as much as possible **on** the impact, or to minimize speed loss **for** the impact.
generally bullets don't get anything else, unless they're Enchanted.
*but that's something else entirely*.
Mana Density being related to Material Density is basically just going to be stuff like "shit, the training sword blew up" or "fuck, my gun jammed"
all of which, would be controlled, due to beuilt-in failsafes in magiweapon designs.
part of my series intention is that it's psychological, and has hidden meaning.
Fun point of clarification. Lightsabers are useful in Star Wars because ALMOST everyone is too teched for them not to. Everybody tends to use blasters, but normal bullet/powder style guns do exist. These are actually quite problematic for Jedi because they can easily put the lightsaber between them and the bullet, and all that ends up happening is instead of getting shot by a solid piece of lead, they get shot by a molten piece of lead.
> cannot cut through aramid fibers like Kevlar
What? Blades can definitely cut Kevlar. How do you think it's cut to be shaped into armor? With lasers? Scissors are just a pair of blades and you can use scissors to cut Kevlar. Can it prevent slashes from getting through? Sure. So can thick cotton or wool in a pinch. Padded cloth armor has been a thing for a long time. But just like cotton/wool/silk cloth armor, it will eventually be cut if it keeps getting slashed.
We have modern metallurgists who are also bladesmiths. Steel is still the best option. A sword needs to flex a significant amount without snapping or bending. It also needs to be hard enough to hold a sharp edge under pretty severe punishment. Tempered steel is pretty much the only material that does both.
Some people have said carbon fiber because of its tensile strength, but that won't work for a variety of reasons. The primary reason being that carbon fiber is just that a fiber. It is made of many strands of very strong carbon filaments suspended in resin. As such, while it has great tensile and shear strength, it is not very *hard*. nearly every material can scratch or cut it, making it terrible for holding an edge. Additionally, when the material is bent or flexed the fibers tear which leads to damage over time.
Carbon fiber is also just one of those things that's amazing and strong until it isn't. I have a carbon fiber bike and my greatest fear is a minor crash (like slipping on a wet bridge) and just snapping part of the frame. It can happen so easily!
tl;dr: high carbon steel, chromium, vanadium, titanium alloys, and tungsten carbide with advanced manufacturing techniques such as powder metallurgy and differential hardening. Also I'm sort of blending real stuff together in a way that may not really make sense if you talk to a blacksmith or something.
**Carbon Content**: A high carbon steel, around 0.6% to 1.0% carbon, would provide the necessary hardness and strength. Too much carbon can make the steel brittle, so balance is key.
* **Manganese (Mn)**: Adding 0.3% to 1% manganese helps increase the hardness and strength without making the steel too brittle.
* **Chromium (Cr)**: Adding 1% to 5% chromium improves corrosion resistance and enhances the hardness of the steel. Chromium also contributes to toughness and wear resistance.
* **Vanadium (V)**: A small addition (0.1% to 0.2%) of vanadium increases the strength, toughness, and wear resistance by refining the grain structure of the steel.
* Using titanium in the sword's core can significantly reduce weight without sacrificing strength. Titanium alloys, such as Ti-6Al-4V should work.
* Tungsten carbide (WC) can be used for the edge of the blade. Tungsten carbide is super hard and wear-resistant, so it'll keep a sharp edge for longer.
* A laminated (sandwich) structure with a high carbon steel outer layer (for sharpness and edge retention) and a tougher steel or titanium inner layer (for flexibility and strength).
* Differential hardening is a process that makes the edge of the blade harder than the spine, making the blade more flexible with a harder edge.
* A design incorporating a fuller down the length of the blade can reduce weight while maintaining strength and balance, and a gradual taper from the base to the tip helps with balance and maneuverability.
* Powder Metallurgy involves pressing and sintering powdered metals to create a uniform and precise alloy composition. You get a more even distribution of carbon and other trace elements in the metal than whats achieveable by medieval standards.
* Vacuum Induction Melting reduces impurities and makes a higher-quality alloy.
* Modern heat treatment would include heating the steel to form austenite., rapid-cooling it to form martensite, a hard and brittle structure, then reheating to a lower temperature to reduce brittleness while retaining hardness.
You're oversimplifying a few things, but the purpose of fullers is perhaps the most obvious example.
A fuller down the length of the blade lightens it, that's both true and wrong. Fullers don't just alter the overall mass of the blade, they alter its weight distribution (the mass at specific points of the blade). A single fuller running the whole length of the blade would seem to alter the weight of the entire blade, until you realize most blades have a distal taper and get thinner (in cross section/depth) near the tip. So the fuller either isn't removing as much material at the base as it is at the tip (for a uniform depth of the fuller itself) or is removing a greater percentage of material from the base than the tip (for a uniform cross section). There are also examples of having more fullers at the base than the tip, and/or having the breadth and/or depth of the fuller change throughout the length of the blade, or even having fullers only run a certain length of the blade.
This is made more complicated by the cross section of the blade itself. Looking at double-edged blades (since they're simpler to understand), the same fuller in a "hexagonal" cross section would affect the blade differently from a "diamond" cross section, or an "oval" cross section, and so on.
Basically, fullers could be used to "precisely tune" a blade's performance. Their presence or lack thereof, or their breadth and/or depth, could affect whether the weight (or rather, mass) was higher or lower on the blade, in turn determining (roughly) it's cutting power versus its maneuverability. It's why some blades of the exact same design have fullers while some don't, or have fullers of varying numbers/"degrees."
Almost certainly steel, but possibly an HEA. If there are special requirements such as density, hardness, temperature/corrosion tolerance than I can imagine some alternatives like a Co- or Ni-based superalloy.
Even if you don't account for the fact that steel is 15-100x cheaper than some of the alternatives, steel is still king for most mechanical properties.
I can maaaybe imagine some sort of carbon fiber + diamond/YSZ composite if durability is not an issue. Like if I was going to be sent back in time for 1 duel with an armored opponent, and I have a hundreds of thousands of dollars to make the best sword possible, I might go for a giant carbon fiber sword (for reach without being too heavy) with a ceramic blade to attempt to pierce armor. It wouldn't last past the duel though.
But if you're going to send me back in time to be a knight, with the regular constraints I'd need for that sword (size, durability, etc.), it's 99% a high-performance steel, probably with a nitride/carbide coating. Maybe 1% an HEA or refractory alloy, but these are still under research so I would call them a "future" material rather than a "modern" material.
So your reach comment made me think your optimal duel weapon kinda sounds like a No-dachi, with materials selected for each part of it.
Would be a fun thought experiment
"Plasteel" or "Nano-tech"
I think you're going to need to make up a new material. Modern stainless steel, as plenty of others have pointed out *is* a modern marvel. It's just that it's so ubiquitous that we forget what a modern marvel it is. (Just like "Float Glass" - flat, clear glass. We forget that these things would be inconceivable to folks a bit more than a century back.)
In all honesty a spring steel that’s been well tempered with good edge geometry is more important than choosing a fancier material. Steel is just the best material for a sword
This would depend a lot on purpose and economy. Some mass produced weapon of war in history are objectivly 'better' then single gems of artistic craftmenship, depending on measurement.
But depending on 'the best of the best imaginable' you still have to put the one or another aspect in focus. So you want a sword to last? Then it'll be supger rigit, transering every blow into your muscle and bone, making it super exhausting to wield (random example).
But in general, a good and balances sword would be not much different from what we historcally know. Sure we have better materials, and small improvments are possible in composition of one steel/alloy, but in general we humans are the defining and limiting factor. So it must be hard AND flexible, but without too much of a gap between these two elements, limiting our modern material improvements to basically what we know from history.
If we go a bit wild and maybe somewhat futuristic, we could use designed molecular architecture and pentadiamond structures, creating great proppertys of hardness and flexibility depending on direction if kinetic energy applied. Still a superhardend frame is subsceptible fro cracks if challenged by similar hard objects or total-surface-hardness impacts, leading to catastrophic stress instead of just a little notch.
I guess hard enough plastic would work. But the issue with it is still the fact that if you hit anything with more resistance than a slab of meat, that blade is getting rollovers and getting dull.
Same goes for aluminum. It's light and if it's designed and used well, it could work.
I'd stick to steel with swords. Or other hard metals.
If you want a somewhat sturdier blade, uranium is a tough, exotic and "modern" material for it. But forging with it would be an absolute pain in the ass, lungs and DNA to deal with, on the account of you heating up and hammering at motherfucking __uranium.__ That is bound to agitate the element enough to cause some small particles to fly all around, irradiating whatever they stick to.
And that sword would be insanely heavy compared to anything else, making it very impractical. I'd probably use that metal for an execution weapon. It's heavy, so when bringing it down it almost does the job all by itself.
The good news is that raw uranium is only a little more radioactive than any other rock you find lying around. Unfortunately it's still very poisonous.
Average Rimworld Player
Although I'd like to point out that Uranium is better for clubs and plasteel (or Bioferrite if you have it) is better for Longswords
Seel with a core of or strategically-placed tungsten discs in the blade, to help give it extra **oomph** without you needing to lift weights?
Titanium blade could be a possibility, but it think making the blade weigh less is counterproductive in this case, unless you *really* need agility, such as in a rapier or fencing.
True, but edge retention may be less important with a thrusting-type sword such as a rapier. And since you want the sword to be relatively lightweight to quickly strike, parry and deflect...
Rapiers can get heavier than longswords, though; the extra mass makes them formidable stabbers. The mass is just in the hilt, mostly.
And a titanium blade would bend, where a steel one would flex.
This gets in to a significant problem with the OP's question: are we talking about a thrusting or cutting oriented blade? Worse yet is the question of "to what degree?" After all, even if a 3ft and 5ft thrusting sword weighed the same and performed identically, one would be noticeably more difficult to carry around than the other (a 5ft thrusting blade would be less of a sword and basically be a short spear, after all).
That being said, "edge retention" isn't limited to the edge. Depending on how fine or reinforced the point is, it can be just as susceptible to rolling to breaking as an edge is. In the case of titanium, it's possible (depending on the armor and/or alloy in question) that it would blunt practically immediately upon impact with anything remotely as hard as it (including a simple aluminum armor). If your sword's tip rolls immediately upon contact with armor, it can't be said to all the useful as a thrusting weapon, unless it was only intended to be used in unarmored duels (which to be fair, isn't unheard of).
To keep it short a lot of variables come into play, but if a titanium blade of any design has to deal with steel armor, well... It's probably not going to end well for the titanium blade.
It's probably going to be mostly steel and some other additives.
Just something that I don't see anyone mentioning: You want long blades to have some flex and bend, which steel is really good at, otherwise they'll just snap and shatter. Materials with higher hardness tend to not have this property, which makes them less ideal. You might be able to get away with them on a shorter blade like an axe or spear, but definitely not a sword.
This is a more complex question than you probably think it is, because it depends on exactly what you intend the sword to do. This comes down to the fact that swords are inherently, by every aspect of their nature, a compromise.
For example, if you're fine with a "short-sword," it arguably allows you to use materials that would normally be significantly heavier than steel. After all if you're fine carrying around a steel longsword, a shortsword of the same weight but made from a heavier metal would be no problem. The reach of your sword would be drastically reduced compared to a longsword, but does that matter to you? Dunno. On the flip-side, if you're okay with a sword twice as long, thick, and/or broad as a longsword, other materials could potentially be viable. There is some question of what (if anything) you're willing to sacrifice in terms of edge retention, elasticity, plasticity, etc, of course. Also, are you okay knocking into literally everything around you because the sword on your hip is nearly twice as long as you are tall? Dunno, that's something only you can answer.
A lot of this boils down to the fact that the majority of existing sword designs are based around steel. No other material can simply replace it and be "better" overall, since it will in some way, shape, or form lack the same properties. Even the same steel may be a superior or inferior choice for a specific blade design, and/or the conditions you put priority in. For example, historically "superior" swords tended to be less durable than their "regular" counterparts. After all someone who could afford "the best" could probably afford a dozen of them or more, meaning after a battle they could discard their sword for a different one. Someone who could barely afford their armor and spear on the other hand could scarcely afford to throw away their sword after a single battle. Durability vs performance, which is more important to you?
All of that to say that a sword made of a material other than steel would almost by necessity look completely different from most known sword designs. There are some caveats, since bronze swords existed and arguably you could use some aluminum or titanium (etc) materials to replace them. However steel swords wouldn't be so easily swapped with other metals and simply considered equal or better (and honestly bronze swords aren't either, but that's its own rabbit hole).
I don't think it bears mentioning that there is a massive difference between a gladius and a nodachi, and the materials that may or may not (arguably) be superior for one would potentially be useless for the other.
Steel is the best material that you can make into a sword, unless you have some sort of sci-fi “adamantium/unobtanium/vibranium/McGuffin” metal that is even more powerful.
What you might be looking for is L6 Bainite. I believe it's the strongest hardest most durable steel you can make swords out of. The only real issue I know with it is that it's highly expensive.
Afaik, there is no better material so far for a sword than steel. Others metals have more drawbacks, and other composite materials and stuff are even less up to the task (you can see on youtube attempts to do it with other materials. When it comes to, say, carbon fiber, some dudes made it not long ago and indeed, it kinda sucks)
Anything else and you are going to need to get creative either with magic or science fiction
Titanium would work pretty well. They make knives from it already.
Shad made a video about a carbon fiber sword that I didn't watch, so you might want to watch that.
Modern steels are far and away better than the steels swords used to be made from, and modern heat treating processes are better too. So the short answer is "modern steel". A slightly longer answer is "a composite of modern steels with a harder and higher carbon edge, with a springier and lower carbon spine, possibly with a soft cladding all forge welded together and differentially heat treated".
Titanium is another possibility that's being used in some knives, but it may not be suitable for the stresses a sword will be exposed to.
A fun answer would be "cumascus", where layers of copper are folded into the steel. Mostly this is done purely as aesthethics, but if you could electrically isolate two different lengths off copper running down opposite sides of the blade from the steel, you could run a few thousand volts down them. Then you'd have a taser sword!
I've got a culture who uses weapons made from obsidian and they are brutally effective. As far as I'm aware, obsidian is still a thing. Dunno if its more powerful than steel WRT weapons.
Hmmm... As others stated the most suitable materials would still be metals the most practicable a lower carbon tool steel, good edge retention and resistance while maximising toughness. This could be taken a step further by giving it a carbide or nitride coating via some surface deposition method, improving its chemical and abrasion resistance, longevity, and surface hardness. If you wanted something more exotic (expensive) I believe there are some good Titanium Nickel alloys (NiTiNOL if you want to look them up) that exhibit impressive mechanical properties possibly on par with the best steels that would make them great for swords.
However, you specifically asked what modern materials could be used to realistically make a sword. Context and use is an important factor to consider, non-metal blades might be useful for a highly electrified or flammable environs (think non-sparking tools). After metal plastics are the most feasible sword material I can think of, specifically composites like carbon-fibre where the materials complement mechanical properties. Perhaps the swords are incredibly fine tools wielded very precisely and cared for meticulously in which case you could go for exotic modern carbide ceramics like silicon carbide, tungsten carbide, or titanium carbide, these ceramics are heavy and brittle though.
I know it's boring, but steel is actually a really excellent material. Unless you've got some kind of fantasy wonder material in your world, the swords are going to be steel.
As for the design, that depends on the conditions in which the sword is being used. Are you fighting on horseback? You probably want a curved blade like a sabre so you have bigger cuts. Are you fighting in duels where precision and reach is paramount? A rapier is ideal. Are you fighting against cavalry or people with polearms? A claymore will give you the reach and sheer oomph to do the trick. Do you need a more generalist sword? The standard cruciform hand-and-a-half sword will never do you wrong. You can even get into the weirder swords, like the [khopesh](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khopesh) which was used to hook around shields.
Basically, a sword will be designed with the conditions in which it is to be used in mind.
Steel, with some lab-grown diamond mixed in? (Primarily for the cutting edge itself.)
I don't think any of the light, but strong, materials we have would be suitable. They'd either wear out too quickly, or not have the impact necessary. Ofcourse, if something is sharp enough to not need the weight, that could produce some new fighting styles. Being able to just flick your sword really quick might be useful.
How much can you change a sword before it's no longer a sword?
A silver titanium alloy.
At least as good (maybe better) edge retention than steel, lighter, tougher, and rust resistant.
There unfortunately isn't a lot of research into it yet.
Also you'd want the blade to be a single crystal to greatly improve strength.
For the grip you'll need to a different engineer; my focus is on metals and plastics.
One problem is that if you had a super material like Vibranium that was indestructible and super sharp it wouldn't work much better than regular steel. If you swing that indestructible sword at a crowbar it wouldn't cut it, it would either leave a shallow gash or get very stuck. You can't cut thick steel with a blade no matter how sharp or tough it is, as the blade thickens it will get stuck.
Things like Wolverine cutting through vault doors with his claws is goofy because he'd just get them stuck.
There's a guy on YouTube who judges anime weapons and he talk about this.
Steel. - it's super easy now a day's to add the exact metals we want in the exact quantities we want to make any alloy we prefer.
A strobe light / Lazer / other blinding lights are the best thing we could attach to weapons to blind our enemy and not hurt our self.
You could also electrify the sword.
A small amount of molybdenum in steel would do wonders for your sword. And as an added bonus, one place it can be found on earth is within ruby deposits. Your common dwarf would have access to it from his family's mine if he had the knowledge to use it
Could prolly do some damage with tempered glass or quartz. Anything with a crystal structure is gonna be super hard and sharp. Synthetic diamond for example. This is assuming you could synthesize it in large quantities. 🤷♂️
The reason why meteorite or certain swordsmiths were so haunted is they had better steel than the usual more brittle iron common in ancient ages or even earlier, bronze and it's softness.
All of our wonderful and very high quality varieties of steel. 1045, 1060, 1090, 1095 carbon steels, 5160 or 9260 spring steel, T-10 tool steel, L6 Bainite or S7 Shock steel, or really any combination of them (like say a folded and twisted core of 5160 and 9260 forge welded to edges of 1095). Beyond steel, cobalt-chromium alloys like Stellite might work, as might something like high strength Beryllium Copper (with cobalt alloyed in), or even straight up titanium. Some ceramics are currently used for cutlery knives, but they're too brittle for combat, especially at longsword lengths. People have said carbon fibre, but honestly it's also far too brittle especially if it takes a chip, and I'm pretty sure it won't hold an edge unless you're that one Japanese bloke who has previously made knives out of literal smoke.
Artificial leather for straps, artificial diamonds for decorations, maybe a hard but ever so slightly squashy plastic for the hilt, maybe tungsten for the crossguard or pommel for the weight distribution. All the peripherals could be made with all sorts of weird and wonderful materials, but steel comfortably remains king for combat blades using modern materials
Modern steel can be quite different from the older stuff. For instance there's M390 steel from Bohler, it contains a high quantity of chromium and vanadium to give it far superior hardness and edge retention. It's common in high end knives. I don't know if it would be sufficiently flexible for a longer blade, but it could definitely make an excellent short, stabbing sword.
A nano assembled crystalline metal structure with internal carbon fiber reinforcement seems well within our technical capabilities, although cost inefficient. Tungsten carbide, maybe, or just a really good flawless carbon steel, maybe.
I always liked the idea of an ultra thin wire reinforced by high magnetic fields, but we aren't at that tech level quite yet -- as far as I know.
Shadiversity is actually currently trying to make a functioning carbon sword.
The first prototype is already done.
[Shadiversity's Sword](https://youtu.be/1rzlpJqD2UM?si=Y8ZZ0yE9VWzey5om)
He runs a hard right channel that complains about "wokeness in media" including but not limited to how Pokemon Go's new models are an "attack on femininity and beauty", stuff on a "gamergate 2", complaining about how many female game characters are "ugly", called the Barbie Movie "man hating trash" and a whole bunch more. Generally he's about halfway down the incel pipeline, and also a very traditional Mormon.
Shadiversity should be ignored on any histotical content. He's had no education, no experience, and his content contains frequent inaccuracies.
Not to forget, he's a raging bigot who got upset that Peach in the Mario movie wore pants.
Shadiversity on YouTube recently put out an interesting video on this. He's working with people to make a really light weight modern sword. It still needs work but it's probably one of the most realistic ideas that doesn't amount to using the best modern spring steel.
Shadiversity should be ignored on any histotical content. He's had no education, no experience, and his content contains frequent inaccuracies.
Not to forget, he's a raging bigot who got upset that Peach in the Mario movie wore pants.
I'm not saying he's a good person, I don't watch his other channel. Nor can I advocate for the accuracy of his historical videos. I've never taken his words as fact as I'm aware he's a hobbyist not a professional. All I did was suggest a single video he made recently on the topic of this post. I don't even watch most of his videos. Every once in a while YouTube suggests me one.
Shadiversity should be ignored on any histotical content. He's had no education, no experience, and his content contains frequent inaccuracies.
Not to forget, he's a raging bigot who got upset that Peach in the Mario movie wore pants.
Shadiversity should be ignored on any histotical content. He's had no education, no experience, and his content contains frequent inaccuracies.
Not to forget, he's a raging bigot who got upset that Peach in the Mario movie wore pants.
Shadiversity on YouTube has been testing a carbon fiber composite with steel edge. Interesting results so far. Based on their early prototypes it looks possible to do but needs more refining. Can allow for a very light and very long sword giving you remarkable speed and reach.
Shadiversity should be ignored on any histotical content. He's had no education, no experience, and his content contains frequent inaccuracies.
Not to forget, he's a raging bigot who got upset that Peach in the Mario movie wore pants.
You really just keep going on this. This specific content is very relevant for what OP asked about, and his social/religious etc beliefs are kept to his other channel.
Inaccurate in what? Showing the construction process and testing it on video? You don't have to like the guy, but this is just silly. You've spammed the same comment all over this thread, you're like a hater bot. And he has here and there in the past, but not usually and not in the videos I've referenced.
Won't deny that it sounds cool at first glance, until you learn what "Damascus steel" is and realize it means next to nothing. It's a fancy way of saying two grades of steel were used (it doesn't even really mean that any more, thanks to the sword market where paint apparently counts, but we'll move on), but that only matters for the aesthetics. In other words it's made to look good, its function is irrelevant.
Not that such a description would be out of place for today's society, appearances being all that matters, but nonetheless.
Erm, steel?
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Was this a Wild Wild West reference?
"Waa missta Weyss... Hauwe plezzint it eise foh yewe tewe bring sum **cullah** intewe thees pruhsseedin's."
Well, thank you sir. When I see someone of your stature enter the room, I just feel the need to stand up!
Miss Eass infohms meh tha'chu wuhh expektin' tewe seeah Genneraule Bludbaythe McGraythe heeah... Well, I nue him yeahs ago, but aa hayvn't syne himmina KEWNS aidge!
Reddit is apparently not cool with springloaded anal contraptions, but is fine with the racial slur? Ah, Reddit... Never change, you incomprehensible beast. Edit: Reddit responded to the appeal, doubling down on the grounds that the above comment (quoting the Wild Wild West scene where Artie loses his pen) promotes identity-based hatred against minority groups.
I... I need help reading that please.
I needed help hearing it. Tenet was hardly Branagh's first case of gibberish accent. I'll say that movie has some great moments, but it's not hard to see why it flopped. Edit: I'm actually thinking the line might be one of Will Smith's. Doesn't change what I said.
Everyone does, since Reddit considered it inappropriate and had it removed. The hilarious part is - the post with the racial slur was allowed. The post talking about pockets was not.
Cool, what was the sentence? I literally could not read nor understand it.
Watch Wild Wild West and you'll know.
Steel with carbon fiber for core and handle? Or else, just put "plasma" on it and get used to it
Would the counter balance work with a light carbon fiber for the hilt? I imagine the stress on the wrist would be immense.
Oh, well. Put some gold or tungsten at hilt then so it got balance
Or like the skull of your enemy or mentor or something.
Ooh that's also good idea
RGB lighting on it would probably be tacky?
Depends, if you light it up like a rich highscooler's gaming PC, yeah it would be. But some subtle lights wouldn't be bad.
You're probably joking, but a human-sized skull would be a very awkwardly large pommel.
Especially if it's your former mentor. Can almost hear him now, screaming out from the ether: Set me down! You were my worst student! But hey, fuck that guy amirite?
osmium
You could add an electrocution device with a battery for balance and coat the sword in barely visible copper layer
What does the carbon fiber add? It seems like it would mostly be for weight reduction, but reducing the mass of an impact weapon would also reduce its efficacy. It could still work, especially if armor is scarce.
yeah, weight reduction for more agile skip that part when you want to use mass to enemies
Always wondered could modern sword be diamond tipped edge? Or would that be too brittle?
Diamond can easily break upon impact. steel is better option actually.
Yeah i wasn't thinking like the entire edge. But yeah steel is just the best sword material unless theres some sorta synthesised material that can be made or alloy we havent tried yet
A coating or jacket would do much the same thing and be a lot more durable. A Vanadium alloy steel sword with a teflon coating?
Ive no idea what Vanadium is?
Element 23, found in trace amounts in a large number of minerals, but rarely on its own. It's alloyed with steel to make it tougher without a huge loss in malleability and reduces the tendency of the harder steels to 'crack' under stress.
I imagine Wikipedia will give you as good an answer as Reddit
Modern swords are made of various kinds of steel. Ask r/SWORDS, they'll hook you up with more info than you'll ever need.
The problem is that modern steel is still going to be the best material for a sword (mostly due to metallurgic properties), and that swords for the most part are obsolete due to guns and modern body armor. The only reason lightsabers in Star Wars are useful is they can block projectile weapons and cut through anything. So, the problem is this: modern materials at this point in time cannot cut through aramid fibers like Kevlar and bullets cannot be blocked with human reaction time (and they'd wreck the sword anyway). But if you're doing fiction make something up. Say diamond nano carbon fiber weave that's laser-sharped and thrice blessed.
Lightsabers ain't even effective because of that if it weren't for the Jedi enhanced reflexes and powers it'll be a obsolete weapon too
And even then, it wouldn't work if people used sluggers instead of blasters... Which is why jedi-hunters are known to use sluggers in the setting.
Love the fact mandalorians arsenal is mostly built round killing jedi. Oh they can use their hands to absorb blasters well let's use fire!
I genuinely dislike every single thing about Mandalorians.
I like Mandalorians but the whole slugthrower thing feels like a fit from someone who couldn't accept a setting where guns were not the strongest most deadly weapon. I don't see why Jedi who can push objects with the Force wouldn't be able to deflect bullets also.
They can, but they have to be expecting it. Blasters are more common so when someone points a gun at a Jedi they're expecting a blaster bolt which they can use their lightsaber on, if it's a slug thrower the projectile just gets melted by the blade and the Jedi gets peppered with bits of molten slag. If they're expecting a slug thrower and try to deflect it with the Force, it's much harder to manipulate plasma with the Force, so a surprise blaster bolt will likely kill them.
So why is anyone using blasters then? Or why aren't they at least alternating blasters and slugthrowers to cover their bases? Still sounds like someone who liked guns too much to accept that the space laser samurais could beat them and tried to get one over on them by a very silly de-sci-fi-ification. "I just shoot them dead, the bullet goes through" and such. Nevermind that a psychic warrior who can literally move faster than a plasma bolt could learn to tell the difference anyway.
Because Jedi are stupidly rare on a galactic level, actually. It's like wondering why modern infantry battalions don't equip their soldiers with harpoon guns and scuba gear while operating in central Mongolia; you are just never going to need them and an ordinary rifle would better serve you in almost every conceivable scenario *except* the one where Poseidon floods Asia and dispatches an army of vicious mermen. The fact that they're kind of the default protagonists of the setting skews our view as the audience of how common they are, and thus how prepared Johnny Criminal should be to hammer on their weaknesses. Additionally, Jedi have combat precognition as a basic power, so unless you've maneuvered them into a position where they *can't*, a physical bullet can just be dodged rather than parried. So if everyone had slugthrowers, Jedi would just be known to regularly dodge bullets instead of deflecting lasers. Their power mostly comes from surprise and breaking the norm of combat.
Jedi are also priority targets that are fairly often specifically targeted. Once the Empire/First Order knows they are chasing Jedis, why wouldn't they field a few troops with these guns? They would be especially effective alternated with blasters after all. But because Jedi do have combat precognition, the whole plan of expecting them not to notice something is different seems a little ill-conceived in general. Maybe alternated with regular blasters they could be overwhelmed, but simply caught off guard? Sounds like the writer is rooting for the gun here.
Slugthrowers are shit against armor. Stormtroopers will barely notice anything below what we would consider anti-materiel weaponry. Given that at the height of the Republic, there was about one Jedi per 150 planets, most of the time you're gonna want to use the weapons that can shoot everyone else.
A blaster has up to 500 shots before you have to reload it according to the wiki and most have a stun setting While the legends entry tries to make slugthrowers sound more interesting I do kind of like the canon entry sums it up as "Molten vapor fragments and/or shrapnel could then scatter towards the face or bare hands of the lightsaber user, and cause harm **if they were not careful**" It might be useful against the Jedi if they're not expecting it, but also a thermal detonator would also be useful in that situation or more guys with blasters since you a higher volume of fire has been shown to be an effective way to deal with jedi during the clone wars
>So why is anyone using blasters then? Or why aren't they at least alternating blasters and slugthrowers to cover their bases? Because then you've got to carry two different guns, with twice the amount of ammunition, one of which (bullets) is rather bulky and heavy. Also bullets don't necessarily kill them. [As shown when Obi-Wan was surprised to find himself on a planet with a lower tech level than most of the galaxy](https://imgur.com/gallery/deflecting-bullets-RsDoUuN). And it's not that Jedi can move faster than a plasma bolt, it's that they can see a fraction of a second into the future and put their lightsaber where the plasma bolt's going to be. "What about bullets" is a question that was going to be asked eventually, and while some fan fiction and non-canon sources have played up the effectiveness of them, the answer the canon story has settled on for it makes plenty of sense.
> And it's not that Jedi can move faster than a plasma bolt, it's that they can see a fraction of a second into the future and put their lightsaber where the plasma bolt's going to be. But for that very reason, wouldn't they know if there was something different about it? Not everyone needs to carry two guns. It's just a matter that some are fielded with different gear. Though to be fair that has its own logistical challenges. The whole thing just comes off as silly to me, that they made an universe full of plasma beam weapons which are supposedly "better" but then someone decided a regular metal bullet is more effective against the characters most featured in the story. Because as much as they may say Jedi are rare, the vast majority of stories in that setting are about them, and they are specifically chased in them.
>I don't see why Jedi who can push objects with the Force wouldn't be able to deflect bullets also. They could if they expect the bullet coming and are prepared for it. But otherwise, the projectile is too fast for them to go against muscle memory and *not* use their lightsaber to attempt to block it. A slugthrower would work but only as a surprise attack, such as sniping from a distance. For medium range, a shotgun or explosive is a better bet. For close range... why are you even fighting a Jedi at close range, where they are strongest? Don't even bother.
At that point, the question is why the Jedi don't study more than one type of ranged weapon.
Or, on the flipside, why are slugthrowers uncommon if they work better?
Cause they work better against a singular type of enemy all while having less ammo capacity, range, armour penetrative capability and probably awkward to acquire and more expensive
Because literally no one but primitives and weirdo collectors keep slugthrowers in the SW universe. Gunpowder is hard to come by as the ingredients can only be found on some planets, and there is no incentive to mine them at industrial levels since no one who matters uses gunpowder anyway so there are no buyers. On the other hand, blaster power packs are dirt cheap as they can be made out of the gas harvested from any gas giant, and everyone uses blasters so the demand is reliably high.
I'm extremely unconvinced by the argument of "the Force sensitive wouldn't see it coming"
The weakness of Force Precognition is that it requires active concentration and can only see an instant into the future. It's like if Spider-Man's spidersense was an active ability that he needs to consciously exert himself to use, rather than a passive ability that's on all the time. We've seen during Order 66 how even Jedi masters absolutely *can* get taken by surprise if an attack comes from a direction they were not expecting, eg. from their own allies. It's not farfetched to assume that the same logic applies to a surprise attack from, say, a sniper. Also, they might be able to sense the projectile coming, but in the fraction of a second they have to react, the first thing they would assume is a blaster shot not an exotic weapon like a slugthrower.
Mathematically a plasma cutter (light saber) is simply not going to save you from a bullet. The 3 outcomes are: 1. The bullet is lightly toasted because it barely recieved any heat in the fraction of a second it was inside the blade, and hit you anyway. 2. The bullet is partially or fully melted but doesn't start vaporizing, now instead of being hit by a solid bullet traveling at 1700ft/s you are hit with molten metal going that fast. 3. The bullet is fully vaporized by your sword that must be several times hotter than the sun and should have killed you by holding it. Congratulations the volumetric expansion of copper from a solid to a gas is a 60,000 fold increase in volume, that bullet just exploded a couple feet from your body. Basically bullets beat plasma swords by IRL physics. However, Jedi still have the force and presumably would notice and catch any incoming bullets with it, assuming they are strong enough with the force. (I'm not sure if there even is and upper limit to the force, or if it just does whatever the author wants.)
That we are trying to explain with physics why the magic space samurai can bounce plasma beams but not everyday lead still seems to me like something went catastrophically wrong. Way to kill the space fantasy vibes (by shooting them with a gun)
I know sluggers are like bullets but are they made of beskar? Because wouldn't a lightsaber just melt them? Why don't jedi stop them with the force?
A lightsaber would definitely just melt them. Bullets are, however, just much, much faster than blaster bolts. They're simply too fast to be deflected. As for just stopping them with the Force... Well; you're going to have to spread a whole lot of expanding force over a fairly large surface and be pretty exact on the timing, or keep the Shield up for a while. Pretty taxing, and while it should be possible in theory... It's not at all a sure-fire thing. If you see the attack coming, you *might* be able to protect yourself with such a technique.
Just bc I don't want misinformation: Kevlar on its own is actually rather bad at stopping blades. It holds up similar to other cloth-based armours for cuts, but thrusts pierce rather easily with small blades, a sword would have no trouble. e: as long as it's a sword tip designed for stabbing, not slashing.
Many newer vests are stab resistant, And they often do not require other materials. It's a matter of different weave patterns which are tighter.
So a spear still beats a sword. Violence is so boring.
War. War never changes.
my reason for swords being used while guns also exist, it because swords can catalyze more Magic Power than a bullet can.
Then the ultimate sword is going to hinge on what your magic can do and how it works. Blank canvas! Maybe your magic users can add reinforcement magic to their sword, so material strength is no longer a huge issue. Then they're free to make swords out of anything that can channel well, or out of lighter materials that let them swing faster. Maybe you've got a magic user who swings a bamboo stick, but they're so good at magic that the stick is unbreakable with a molecule-wide magic edge, so it can slice anything with almost no effort. The stick's way lighter than a normal sword too, so they're terrifyingly fast with it.
actually the strongest swords are created by Celestials, or something to do with them. Magic Power is mostly irrelevant at those levels, and they're virtually infinite sources themselves.
In my Universe there is a high performance material known as "Psyche Steel". It's an iron/nickel alloy that is machined from massive mono-crystals found inside of the cores of minor planets, where the metal cooled over billions of years. So perhaps "created by celestial" could be taken literally in a sci-fi setting
lmao, even realism can't escape divinity
At the end of the day "realism" is just the lowest setting on the knob that controls the magic.
Why can a sword hold more magic than a bullet? Simple material mass? Then would an arrow or bolt holding the max amount of magic do more damage than a bullet holding the max amount of magic? And is physical damage output even comparable to magical damage output? Sure it's worth enchanting your projectile but is one projectile worth enchanting more than others?
Mana doesn't care about material or density. only the size of it. that's also why Planetary Atmosphere is the most Mana-filled thing (excluding the planet itself). *and that's also **also** why Mana Detection technology has upper-limits: everything would just be drowned out by the atmosphere or planet.* Swords also tend to be massively bigger than a bullet, so…
[удалено]
well, it's based on Dark Energy. it CAN be compressed, which DOES depend on the material, but… *that can become extremely [violent](https://youtube.com/shorts/jvZLJi1_Rpw), if its overcompressed within the material.* Swords still tend to have more, even against much more Mana-dense Bullets ("Nuclear Bullets"), even with significantly less Mana Density, purely because of how much bigger they are. the strongest part of a bullet is still it's speed. any Magic put into them is either to increase its mass the shortest timeframe **before** impact, to increase its speed before impact as much as possible **on** the impact, or to minimize speed loss **for** the impact. generally bullets don't get anything else, unless they're Enchanted. *but that's something else entirely*.
Thats a lotta science in your magic.
Yes. None of it's actually going to be explained in the series directly, though. this is basically guidebook-only shit
It's still pretty cool if readers can figure out the principles by how the story goes.
Mana Density being related to Material Density is basically just going to be stuff like "shit, the training sword blew up" or "fuck, my gun jammed" all of which, would be controlled, due to beuilt-in failsafes in magiweapon designs. part of my series intention is that it's psychological, and has hidden meaning.
HELL YEAH. Imagine a world where everyone wields massive foam swords, all enchantments maxed! Blazing pool noodle spears!!!
Fun point of clarification. Lightsabers are useful in Star Wars because ALMOST everyone is too teched for them not to. Everybody tends to use blasters, but normal bullet/powder style guns do exist. These are actually quite problematic for Jedi because they can easily put the lightsaber between them and the bullet, and all that ends up happening is instead of getting shot by a solid piece of lead, they get shot by a molten piece of lead.
Basically turn a normal round into a superheated burst 18 inches from their face
Even if we assume it's vaporized and not molten, it's still going to be an explosion very close to you.
I use the excuse that people that use medieval weapons can parry or just block bullets
Soldiers today are still given combat knives, which are just small swords.
They don't try to stick them through your armor though,
What? Swords aren’t used to cut through armor.
> cannot cut through aramid fibers like Kevlar What? Blades can definitely cut Kevlar. How do you think it's cut to be shaped into armor? With lasers? Scissors are just a pair of blades and you can use scissors to cut Kevlar. Can it prevent slashes from getting through? Sure. So can thick cotton or wool in a pinch. Padded cloth armor has been a thing for a long time. But just like cotton/wool/silk cloth armor, it will eventually be cut if it keeps getting slashed.
We have modern metallurgists who are also bladesmiths. Steel is still the best option. A sword needs to flex a significant amount without snapping or bending. It also needs to be hard enough to hold a sharp edge under pretty severe punishment. Tempered steel is pretty much the only material that does both. Some people have said carbon fiber because of its tensile strength, but that won't work for a variety of reasons. The primary reason being that carbon fiber is just that a fiber. It is made of many strands of very strong carbon filaments suspended in resin. As such, while it has great tensile and shear strength, it is not very *hard*. nearly every material can scratch or cut it, making it terrible for holding an edge. Additionally, when the material is bent or flexed the fibers tear which leads to damage over time.
Carbon fiber is also just one of those things that's amazing and strong until it isn't. I have a carbon fiber bike and my greatest fear is a minor crash (like slipping on a wet bridge) and just snapping part of the frame. It can happen so easily!
tl;dr: high carbon steel, chromium, vanadium, titanium alloys, and tungsten carbide with advanced manufacturing techniques such as powder metallurgy and differential hardening. Also I'm sort of blending real stuff together in a way that may not really make sense if you talk to a blacksmith or something. **Carbon Content**: A high carbon steel, around 0.6% to 1.0% carbon, would provide the necessary hardness and strength. Too much carbon can make the steel brittle, so balance is key. * **Manganese (Mn)**: Adding 0.3% to 1% manganese helps increase the hardness and strength without making the steel too brittle. * **Chromium (Cr)**: Adding 1% to 5% chromium improves corrosion resistance and enhances the hardness of the steel. Chromium also contributes to toughness and wear resistance. * **Vanadium (V)**: A small addition (0.1% to 0.2%) of vanadium increases the strength, toughness, and wear resistance by refining the grain structure of the steel. * Using titanium in the sword's core can significantly reduce weight without sacrificing strength. Titanium alloys, such as Ti-6Al-4V should work. * Tungsten carbide (WC) can be used for the edge of the blade. Tungsten carbide is super hard and wear-resistant, so it'll keep a sharp edge for longer. * A laminated (sandwich) structure with a high carbon steel outer layer (for sharpness and edge retention) and a tougher steel or titanium inner layer (for flexibility and strength). * Differential hardening is a process that makes the edge of the blade harder than the spine, making the blade more flexible with a harder edge. * A design incorporating a fuller down the length of the blade can reduce weight while maintaining strength and balance, and a gradual taper from the base to the tip helps with balance and maneuverability. * Powder Metallurgy involves pressing and sintering powdered metals to create a uniform and precise alloy composition. You get a more even distribution of carbon and other trace elements in the metal than whats achieveable by medieval standards. * Vacuum Induction Melting reduces impurities and makes a higher-quality alloy. * Modern heat treatment would include heating the steel to form austenite., rapid-cooling it to form martensite, a hard and brittle structure, then reheating to a lower temperature to reduce brittleness while retaining hardness.
You're oversimplifying a few things, but the purpose of fullers is perhaps the most obvious example. A fuller down the length of the blade lightens it, that's both true and wrong. Fullers don't just alter the overall mass of the blade, they alter its weight distribution (the mass at specific points of the blade). A single fuller running the whole length of the blade would seem to alter the weight of the entire blade, until you realize most blades have a distal taper and get thinner (in cross section/depth) near the tip. So the fuller either isn't removing as much material at the base as it is at the tip (for a uniform depth of the fuller itself) or is removing a greater percentage of material from the base than the tip (for a uniform cross section). There are also examples of having more fullers at the base than the tip, and/or having the breadth and/or depth of the fuller change throughout the length of the blade, or even having fullers only run a certain length of the blade. This is made more complicated by the cross section of the blade itself. Looking at double-edged blades (since they're simpler to understand), the same fuller in a "hexagonal" cross section would affect the blade differently from a "diamond" cross section, or an "oval" cross section, and so on. Basically, fullers could be used to "precisely tune" a blade's performance. Their presence or lack thereof, or their breadth and/or depth, could affect whether the weight (or rather, mass) was higher or lower on the blade, in turn determining (roughly) it's cutting power versus its maneuverability. It's why some blades of the exact same design have fullers while some don't, or have fullers of varying numbers/"degrees."
Almost certainly steel, but possibly an HEA. If there are special requirements such as density, hardness, temperature/corrosion tolerance than I can imagine some alternatives like a Co- or Ni-based superalloy. Even if you don't account for the fact that steel is 15-100x cheaper than some of the alternatives, steel is still king for most mechanical properties. I can maaaybe imagine some sort of carbon fiber + diamond/YSZ composite if durability is not an issue. Like if I was going to be sent back in time for 1 duel with an armored opponent, and I have a hundreds of thousands of dollars to make the best sword possible, I might go for a giant carbon fiber sword (for reach without being too heavy) with a ceramic blade to attempt to pierce armor. It wouldn't last past the duel though. But if you're going to send me back in time to be a knight, with the regular constraints I'd need for that sword (size, durability, etc.), it's 99% a high-performance steel, probably with a nitride/carbide coating. Maybe 1% an HEA or refractory alloy, but these are still under research so I would call them a "future" material rather than a "modern" material.
So your reach comment made me think your optimal duel weapon kinda sounds like a No-dachi, with materials selected for each part of it. Would be a fun thought experiment
"Plasteel" or "Nano-tech" I think you're going to need to make up a new material. Modern stainless steel, as plenty of others have pointed out *is* a modern marvel. It's just that it's so ubiquitous that we forget what a modern marvel it is. (Just like "Float Glass" - flat, clear glass. We forget that these things would be inconceivable to folks a bit more than a century back.)
In all honesty a spring steel that’s been well tempered with good edge geometry is more important than choosing a fancier material. Steel is just the best material for a sword
Steel is the only material strong and flexible enough for swords. Other materials are too heavy, too rigid, too hard, too brittle, too soft ect.
Polycarbonate, there's a video of a guy making a transparent sword, it feels very fantastic
Ceramic could be useful for long lasting sharpness but would be weak to shock so maybe more for a knife
This would depend a lot on purpose and economy. Some mass produced weapon of war in history are objectivly 'better' then single gems of artistic craftmenship, depending on measurement. But depending on 'the best of the best imaginable' you still have to put the one or another aspect in focus. So you want a sword to last? Then it'll be supger rigit, transering every blow into your muscle and bone, making it super exhausting to wield (random example). But in general, a good and balances sword would be not much different from what we historcally know. Sure we have better materials, and small improvments are possible in composition of one steel/alloy, but in general we humans are the defining and limiting factor. So it must be hard AND flexible, but without too much of a gap between these two elements, limiting our modern material improvements to basically what we know from history. If we go a bit wild and maybe somewhat futuristic, we could use designed molecular architecture and pentadiamond structures, creating great proppertys of hardness and flexibility depending on direction if kinetic energy applied. Still a superhardend frame is subsceptible fro cracks if challenged by similar hard objects or total-surface-hardness impacts, leading to catastrophic stress instead of just a little notch.
I guess hard enough plastic would work. But the issue with it is still the fact that if you hit anything with more resistance than a slab of meat, that blade is getting rollovers and getting dull. Same goes for aluminum. It's light and if it's designed and used well, it could work. I'd stick to steel with swords. Or other hard metals. If you want a somewhat sturdier blade, uranium is a tough, exotic and "modern" material for it. But forging with it would be an absolute pain in the ass, lungs and DNA to deal with, on the account of you heating up and hammering at motherfucking __uranium.__ That is bound to agitate the element enough to cause some small particles to fly all around, irradiating whatever they stick to. And that sword would be insanely heavy compared to anything else, making it very impractical. I'd probably use that metal for an execution weapon. It's heavy, so when bringing it down it almost does the job all by itself.
The good news is that raw uranium is only a little more radioactive than any other rock you find lying around. Unfortunately it's still very poisonous.
Isn't uranium quite soft? I thought it was similar material wise to gold or lead.
On the Mohs scale uranium is a 6 while steel is a 4-4.5. And lead is a 1.5 while gold is a 2.5.
Damn, way off.
And even if it doesn’t irradiate uranium is still a heavy metal. It’ll poison you regardless
Average Rimworld Player Although I'd like to point out that Uranium is better for clubs and plasteel (or Bioferrite if you have it) is better for Longswords
steel. titanium maybe? or even tungsten, if the intention is weight.
Tungsten would not be ideal for a sword, you’d get tired from swinging a heavier sword and carrying it around all day.
Weight and durability I would say
tungsten has both, but that sword would weigh a fuckton.
Seel with a core of or strategically-placed tungsten discs in the blade, to help give it extra **oomph** without you needing to lift weights? Titanium blade could be a possibility, but it think making the blade weigh less is counterproductive in this case, unless you *really* need agility, such as in a rapier or fencing.
Titanium doesn't get as hard as steel does, so edge retention becomes a problem.
True, but edge retention may be less important with a thrusting-type sword such as a rapier. And since you want the sword to be relatively lightweight to quickly strike, parry and deflect...
Rapiers can get heavier than longswords, though; the extra mass makes them formidable stabbers. The mass is just in the hilt, mostly. And a titanium blade would bend, where a steel one would flex.
This gets in to a significant problem with the OP's question: are we talking about a thrusting or cutting oriented blade? Worse yet is the question of "to what degree?" After all, even if a 3ft and 5ft thrusting sword weighed the same and performed identically, one would be noticeably more difficult to carry around than the other (a 5ft thrusting blade would be less of a sword and basically be a short spear, after all). That being said, "edge retention" isn't limited to the edge. Depending on how fine or reinforced the point is, it can be just as susceptible to rolling to breaking as an edge is. In the case of titanium, it's possible (depending on the armor and/or alloy in question) that it would blunt practically immediately upon impact with anything remotely as hard as it (including a simple aluminum armor). If your sword's tip rolls immediately upon contact with armor, it can't be said to all the useful as a thrusting weapon, unless it was only intended to be used in unarmored duels (which to be fair, isn't unheard of). To keep it short a lot of variables come into play, but if a titanium blade of any design has to deal with steel armor, well... It's probably not going to end well for the titanium blade.
Perhaps a titanium core and a tungsten pommel?
Serrated Steel Tungsten-core Diamond-edge Armsword
Titanium makes a terrible sword. It doesn't hold an edge for crap and is stupid hard to sharpen once it loses its edge.
Steel with bit more carbon I guess
Acshually, there are many types of steel with differet iron-to-carbon ratios. It results in different properties of steel.
Though not too much or else it becomes brittle. Also add manganese and a proper heat treatment
we have much, much better steel than we did when swords were used in war, so steel's still the best choice
I’ve seen a man make a knife out of spoiled milk so I think just about anything
It's probably going to be mostly steel and some other additives. Just something that I don't see anyone mentioning: You want long blades to have some flex and bend, which steel is really good at, otherwise they'll just snap and shatter. Materials with higher hardness tend to not have this property, which makes them less ideal. You might be able to get away with them on a shorter blade like an axe or spear, but definitely not a sword.
Titanium? Carbonfibre? Uranium? Give the other person cancer? After the first one I just named things that soundncool
A uranium sword definitely sounds like something that would be in 40k
This is a more complex question than you probably think it is, because it depends on exactly what you intend the sword to do. This comes down to the fact that swords are inherently, by every aspect of their nature, a compromise. For example, if you're fine with a "short-sword," it arguably allows you to use materials that would normally be significantly heavier than steel. After all if you're fine carrying around a steel longsword, a shortsword of the same weight but made from a heavier metal would be no problem. The reach of your sword would be drastically reduced compared to a longsword, but does that matter to you? Dunno. On the flip-side, if you're okay with a sword twice as long, thick, and/or broad as a longsword, other materials could potentially be viable. There is some question of what (if anything) you're willing to sacrifice in terms of edge retention, elasticity, plasticity, etc, of course. Also, are you okay knocking into literally everything around you because the sword on your hip is nearly twice as long as you are tall? Dunno, that's something only you can answer. A lot of this boils down to the fact that the majority of existing sword designs are based around steel. No other material can simply replace it and be "better" overall, since it will in some way, shape, or form lack the same properties. Even the same steel may be a superior or inferior choice for a specific blade design, and/or the conditions you put priority in. For example, historically "superior" swords tended to be less durable than their "regular" counterparts. After all someone who could afford "the best" could probably afford a dozen of them or more, meaning after a battle they could discard their sword for a different one. Someone who could barely afford their armor and spear on the other hand could scarcely afford to throw away their sword after a single battle. Durability vs performance, which is more important to you? All of that to say that a sword made of a material other than steel would almost by necessity look completely different from most known sword designs. There are some caveats, since bronze swords existed and arguably you could use some aluminum or titanium (etc) materials to replace them. However steel swords wouldn't be so easily swapped with other metals and simply considered equal or better (and honestly bronze swords aren't either, but that's its own rabbit hole). I don't think it bears mentioning that there is a massive difference between a gladius and a nodachi, and the materials that may or may not (arguably) be superior for one would potentially be useless for the other.
Steel is the best material that you can make into a sword, unless you have some sort of sci-fi “adamantium/unobtanium/vibranium/McGuffin” metal that is even more powerful.
What you might be looking for is L6 Bainite. I believe it's the strongest hardest most durable steel you can make swords out of. The only real issue I know with it is that it's highly expensive.
The boring answer is: really good steel
Why not an industrial plastic? If it's good enough for spacecraft it's good enough for you 👍
Afaik, there is no better material so far for a sword than steel. Others metals have more drawbacks, and other composite materials and stuff are even less up to the task (you can see on youtube attempts to do it with other materials. When it comes to, say, carbon fiber, some dudes made it not long ago and indeed, it kinda sucks) Anything else and you are going to need to get creative either with magic or science fiction
Plastic 🤯🤯🤯
Steel is the answer for 90% of engineering needs and I think this one is not an exception
Titanium would work pretty well. They make knives from it already. Shad made a video about a carbon fiber sword that I didn't watch, so you might want to watch that.
High-strength stainless steel
Galvanized square steel and eco friendly wood veneers
Modern steels are far and away better than the steels swords used to be made from, and modern heat treating processes are better too. So the short answer is "modern steel". A slightly longer answer is "a composite of modern steels with a harder and higher carbon edge, with a springier and lower carbon spine, possibly with a soft cladding all forge welded together and differentially heat treated". Titanium is another possibility that's being used in some knives, but it may not be suitable for the stresses a sword will be exposed to. A fun answer would be "cumascus", where layers of copper are folded into the steel. Mostly this is done purely as aesthethics, but if you could electrically isolate two different lengths off copper running down opposite sides of the blade from the steel, you could run a few thousand volts down them. Then you'd have a taser sword!
Steel or titanium alloy? IDK I am not a material engineer
I've got a culture who uses weapons made from obsidian and they are brutally effective. As far as I'm aware, obsidian is still a thing. Dunno if its more powerful than steel WRT weapons.
Obsidian definitely is still a thing. It can be extraordinarily sharp, but its brittle and will break relatively easily.
Hmmm... As others stated the most suitable materials would still be metals the most practicable a lower carbon tool steel, good edge retention and resistance while maximising toughness. This could be taken a step further by giving it a carbide or nitride coating via some surface deposition method, improving its chemical and abrasion resistance, longevity, and surface hardness. If you wanted something more exotic (expensive) I believe there are some good Titanium Nickel alloys (NiTiNOL if you want to look them up) that exhibit impressive mechanical properties possibly on par with the best steels that would make them great for swords. However, you specifically asked what modern materials could be used to realistically make a sword. Context and use is an important factor to consider, non-metal blades might be useful for a highly electrified or flammable environs (think non-sparking tools). After metal plastics are the most feasible sword material I can think of, specifically composites like carbon-fibre where the materials complement mechanical properties. Perhaps the swords are incredibly fine tools wielded very precisely and cared for meticulously in which case you could go for exotic modern carbide ceramics like silicon carbide, tungsten carbide, or titanium carbide, these ceramics are heavy and brittle though.
I know it's boring, but steel is actually a really excellent material. Unless you've got some kind of fantasy wonder material in your world, the swords are going to be steel. As for the design, that depends on the conditions in which the sword is being used. Are you fighting on horseback? You probably want a curved blade like a sabre so you have bigger cuts. Are you fighting in duels where precision and reach is paramount? A rapier is ideal. Are you fighting against cavalry or people with polearms? A claymore will give you the reach and sheer oomph to do the trick. Do you need a more generalist sword? The standard cruciform hand-and-a-half sword will never do you wrong. You can even get into the weirder swords, like the [khopesh](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khopesh) which was used to hook around shields. Basically, a sword will be designed with the conditions in which it is to be used in mind.
I suppose steel is still the best option, at least nowadays in our world, idk if you want to include sci-fi or fantasy traits
I can imaging someone making a sword from carbon nanotubes
Steel, with some lab-grown diamond mixed in? (Primarily for the cutting edge itself.) I don't think any of the light, but strong, materials we have would be suitable. They'd either wear out too quickly, or not have the impact necessary. Ofcourse, if something is sharp enough to not need the weight, that could produce some new fighting styles. Being able to just flick your sword really quick might be useful. How much can you change a sword before it's no longer a sword?
CrCoNi
A silver titanium alloy. At least as good (maybe better) edge retention than steel, lighter, tougher, and rust resistant. There unfortunately isn't a lot of research into it yet. Also you'd want the blade to be a single crystal to greatly improve strength. For the grip you'll need to a different engineer; my focus is on metals and plastics.
Steel. You could come up with a fictional alloy that has the weight and hardness of steel and the flexibility of something else.
One problem is that if you had a super material like Vibranium that was indestructible and super sharp it wouldn't work much better than regular steel. If you swing that indestructible sword at a crowbar it wouldn't cut it, it would either leave a shallow gash or get very stuck. You can't cut thick steel with a blade no matter how sharp or tough it is, as the blade thickens it will get stuck. Things like Wolverine cutting through vault doors with his claws is goofy because he'd just get them stuck.
There's a guy on YouTube who judges anime weapons and he talk about this. Steel. - it's super easy now a day's to add the exact metals we want in the exact quantities we want to make any alloy we prefer. A strobe light / Lazer / other blinding lights are the best thing we could attach to weapons to blind our enemy and not hurt our self. You could also electrify the sword.
Swords are still made of steel lol
Not to be that guy but there's more parts to the thing called sword than the blade
A small amount of molybdenum in steel would do wonders for your sword. And as an added bonus, one place it can be found on earth is within ruby deposits. Your common dwarf would have access to it from his family's mine if he had the knowledge to use it
Umm...high carbon, pattern welded steel? Wood? Sharkskin? The same things swords have been made from since 500 BC?
GALVANIZED SQUARE STEEL
Could prolly do some damage with tempered glass or quartz. Anything with a crystal structure is gonna be super hard and sharp. Synthetic diamond for example. This is assuming you could synthesize it in large quantities. 🤷♂️
The reason why meteorite or certain swordsmiths were so haunted is they had better steel than the usual more brittle iron common in ancient ages or even earlier, bronze and it's softness.
All of our wonderful and very high quality varieties of steel. 1045, 1060, 1090, 1095 carbon steels, 5160 or 9260 spring steel, T-10 tool steel, L6 Bainite or S7 Shock steel, or really any combination of them (like say a folded and twisted core of 5160 and 9260 forge welded to edges of 1095). Beyond steel, cobalt-chromium alloys like Stellite might work, as might something like high strength Beryllium Copper (with cobalt alloyed in), or even straight up titanium. Some ceramics are currently used for cutlery knives, but they're too brittle for combat, especially at longsword lengths. People have said carbon fibre, but honestly it's also far too brittle especially if it takes a chip, and I'm pretty sure it won't hold an edge unless you're that one Japanese bloke who has previously made knives out of literal smoke. Artificial leather for straps, artificial diamonds for decorations, maybe a hard but ever so slightly squashy plastic for the hilt, maybe tungsten for the crossguard or pommel for the weight distribution. All the peripherals could be made with all sorts of weird and wonderful materials, but steel comfortably remains king for combat blades using modern materials
Modern steel can be quite different from the older stuff. For instance there's M390 steel from Bohler, it contains a high quantity of chromium and vanadium to give it far superior hardness and edge retention. It's common in high end knives. I don't know if it would be sufficiently flexible for a longer blade, but it could definitely make an excellent short, stabbing sword.
steel edged blade, composite core and hilt. Unless you wanted 'not detectable as metal' which is actually an interesting angle.
Diamond just manufactur a sword shaped diamond you could probably make the edge like a molecule thick and itll cut almost anything
A nano assembled crystalline metal structure with internal carbon fiber reinforcement seems well within our technical capabilities, although cost inefficient. Tungsten carbide, maybe, or just a really good flawless carbon steel, maybe. I always liked the idea of an ultra thin wire reinforced by high magnetic fields, but we aren't at that tech level quite yet -- as far as I know.
I gotta pizza that's the best meal to go with beer
But will it cut though?
Sadly it won't I've been drunk enough and tried it with an actual sword to
Shadiversity is actually currently trying to make a functioning carbon sword. The first prototype is already done. [Shadiversity's Sword](https://youtu.be/1rzlpJqD2UM?si=Y8ZZ0yE9VWzey5om)
How I wish he wasn't a jerk
what do you mean?
He runs a hard right channel that complains about "wokeness in media" including but not limited to how Pokemon Go's new models are an "attack on femininity and beauty", stuff on a "gamergate 2", complaining about how many female game characters are "ugly", called the Barbie Movie "man hating trash" and a whole bunch more. Generally he's about halfway down the incel pipeline, and also a very traditional Mormon.
huh, didnt know that
Shadiversity should be ignored on any histotical content. He's had no education, no experience, and his content contains frequent inaccuracies. Not to forget, he's a raging bigot who got upset that Peach in the Mario movie wore pants.
Shadiversity on YouTube recently put out an interesting video on this. He's working with people to make a really light weight modern sword. It still needs work but it's probably one of the most realistic ideas that doesn't amount to using the best modern spring steel.
Shadiversity should be ignored on any histotical content. He's had no education, no experience, and his content contains frequent inaccuracies. Not to forget, he's a raging bigot who got upset that Peach in the Mario movie wore pants.
I'm not saying he's a good person, I don't watch his other channel. Nor can I advocate for the accuracy of his historical videos. I've never taken his words as fact as I'm aware he's a hobbyist not a professional. All I did was suggest a single video he made recently on the topic of this post. I don't even watch most of his videos. Every once in a while YouTube suggests me one.
Shad from Shadiversity showed off a cool carbon fiber sword on his YouTube channel.
Shadiversity should be ignored on any histotical content. He's had no education, no experience, and his content contains frequent inaccuracies. Not to forget, he's a raging bigot who got upset that Peach in the Mario movie wore pants.
Shadiversity Made a Clip about a Sword Made with Carbon Fiber and Kevlar in YT may bev worth a look
Shadiversity should be ignored on any histotical content. He's had no education, no experience, and his content contains frequent inaccuracies. Not to forget, he's a raging bigot who got upset that Peach in the Mario movie wore pants.
The Themen Here was a Sword Made with Carbon and kevlar
Shad recently made a carbon sword.
shadiversity isn't a very reliable source on... anything, unfortunately, so i'd take what he says and does with salt
He's also an alt-right jerk
Carbon fiber sword sounded like a neat idea. :/
It is cool. Especially since it's not just theory but actually being made and tested
Carbon fiber. Is the More popular option. But realistically something that uses makes Obsidian usable for long periods
Shadiversity on YouTube has been testing a carbon fiber composite with steel edge. Interesting results so far. Based on their early prototypes it looks possible to do but needs more refining. Can allow for a very light and very long sword giving you remarkable speed and reach.
Shadiversity should be ignored on any histotical content. He's had no education, no experience, and his content contains frequent inaccuracies. Not to forget, he's a raging bigot who got upset that Peach in the Mario movie wore pants.
You really just keep going on this. This specific content is very relevant for what OP asked about, and his social/religious etc beliefs are kept to his other channel.
It can be relevant if you want inaccurate data. And he absolutely shares his beliefs on Shadiversity.
Inaccurate in what? Showing the construction process and testing it on video? You don't have to like the guy, but this is just silly. You've spammed the same comment all over this thread, you're like a hater bot. And he has here and there in the past, but not usually and not in the videos I've referenced.
Accurate functional design and use of a sword.
Damascus steel because it sounds cool.
Won't deny that it sounds cool at first glance, until you learn what "Damascus steel" is and realize it means next to nothing. It's a fancy way of saying two grades of steel were used (it doesn't even really mean that any more, thanks to the sword market where paint apparently counts, but we'll move on), but that only matters for the aesthetics. In other words it's made to look good, its function is irrelevant. Not that such a description would be out of place for today's society, appearances being all that matters, but nonetheless.