Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Interesting thread. A lot of equating number of deaths to level of brutality, which is one way to go about it. I'd look at how they die though.
Something from the age of musketry.
Before that casualties generally had a limb hacked off or a big bite taken by some sort of bladed weapon. Bleed out fast, lose consciousness even faster. Not bad, though far better to win than lose of course.
Beyond muskets eventually projectiles reach velocities where their penetrating power tends to make the damage reach internal organs where the blood supplied to that organ leads once again to a fairly quick bleed out.
Ah, but the humble musket ball...often lodged in the muscle because it doesn't have enough penetrating power to really bring about a mortal injury...except for the fact that battlefields are notoriously filthy places. So you get a huge fraction of the combatants disabled but surviving the battle, only to die slow agonizing deaths by infection. Pass.
Something from the age of musketry.
Before that casualties generally had a limb hacked off or a big bite taken by some sort of bladed weapon. Bleed out fast, lose consciousness even faster. Not bad, though far better to win than lose of course.
Beyond muskets eventually projectiles reach velocities where their penetrating power tends to make the damage reach internal organs where the blood supplied to that organ leads once again to a fairly quick bleed out.
Ah, but the humble musket ball...often lodged in the muscle because it doesn't have enough penetrating power to really bring about a mortal injury...except for the fact that battlefields are notoriously filthy places. So you get a huge fraction of the combatants disabled but surviving the battle, only to die slow agonizing deaths by infection. Pass.