Aren't we all....???

Now i have Beethoven 6 5 tune in my head.

@uncletigger I'm confused and intrigued.

Lovely idea!

This is the elevator pitch version for a movie about a serial killer who wore a clown mask while hunting people with a crossbow.

Now I want that too.

Help in the smithy isn't servants work. That's what you have apprentices for.

@@ZarlanTheGreen Well, I don't. And I could get by with plain "hold this so I can use the sledgehammer".

@@Erikreaver My point is, that your complaint isn't about a lack of servants, but of a lack of apprentices.

@@ZarlanTheGreen unless you just hold stuff like a mobile tool rack....then its servants work. apprentices have the privilege of using the tools themselves, servants do not (if servants do use the tools without permission a good flogging is in order XD)

@@alexd1559 Quite.

For real, I would love this

I'm in!

You're very welcome, and if I just might add one other thing that has come into my mind from seeing your work. What I realized is that the medieval world that I had imagined before has been shattered, because if we examine the way things must have been, again after seeing the precision work and fine craftsmanship that you have shown us in the daggers, swords, cross-bows and others, then their worldly things would have been made in similar fashion. The clothes, buildings, saddles, etc. made very well. From seeing your work, I now see their world as something much richer, where finely made objects and buildings were commonplace.

@@tekannon7803 I doubt you'd see this level of craftsmanship outside a king's or very rich noble's hands. It was enough if it performed and looked good from a distance.

@@Nerezza1 Thank you for your feedback. The thing is that Tod's work has made medieval Europe turn from black and white to color in my mind. We'll never really know, will we? But if those daggers and swords and scabbards and crossbows are any indication of how finely they could craft things, then it just goes to show that every other thing that was made by hand was of the same level of expertise. We mustn't forget, that it was only until the end of the 1800's when everyone knew how to draw. You had to didn't you? To draw a map to get to your house, stuff like that. If you go to Rome, the best designed buildings to me are 500 years old. They knew what things should look like and they knew how to draw.

@@tekannon7803 D.N. TE'KANNON Tod has made a video on this where he explains that they usually didn't make things very well. It needed to look good from a distance. As for being able to draw, I seriously doubt your average person had paper, canvas or even leather to draw on. It was expensive and food was more important. If you needed to show someone where you lived you gave them directions or showed them. Most people up until the 1800s were also uneducated and couldn't read or write.

@@tods_workshop thanks!!

@@tods_workshop Hmm, you have a point there.

Tod's Workshop haha nice, sadly I’m Canadian, so that counts me out

I wager that technical limitations and logistics were parts of it. You needed minimum draw weights to get through clothing and armor (or even to better power through what would otherwise be glancing blows or shots too weak to inflict meaningful damage or disruption) at the time and pulling back missile mechanisms by hand required extensive strength and training which made them a specialized unit. Crossbows, by comparison, took a lot less specialized training, yet you simply have to use comparatively slow devices to ready the thing at draw weights that were sufficient for combat use. Modern missile weapons, by comparison, can reliably produce a meaningfully dangerous power to their shots even when sacrificing power in a manner that I suspect cannot really be compared to medieval and renaissance crossbows; their power and speed are both still so high, especially relative to the efficacy of the average defensive equipment that each needs to overcome to be effective, that sacrificing power for firing rate is still an effective option whereas it was not with crossbows. If you wanted rate of 'fire', you had to use longbows which were drastically less available by comparison.

Maybe fashionable again?

@@tods_workshop What's the wear and tear on them like? Any parts that need replacing after a while, and how do you maintain them?

That'd be a short video. It necessitated armor so thick that it became impractical, and, if the armor failed, it made the effect of the bullet much worse on the body, so you were better off not wearing any and taking your chances. The end.

mkultraification I meant from a historical perspective, and thanks for commenting 😊

Probably yes, but they are by nature far more complicated ad harder to look after

@@tods_workshop Do you know what the legal situation is in Europe and North America in that regard?

@@tods_workshop Well, it's not meaningless by any stretch. You already have a complete set of variables established and now the ONLY thing you have to change is the weapon and draw weight. It's very easy to do at this point and would go a long way to show penetration effectiveness of that era.

@@tods_workshop I agree with Kswa S. Even though we know the bolt energies are similar to the Warbow, it would still be a valuable "Myth Bust". We could then move on to more interesting questions like at what distance a Crossbow can consistently target a particular weak spot of a harness. Plus everyone wants to see some expensive crossbow bolts explode!

Don't know if you've found it, but I'm 99% sure it's a variation on the Chaconne from Purcell's Dioclesian. It's a great piece :P

There's more than enough time to reset while His Lordship aims and fires.

Another crossbow and a servant to load it.

@@tods_workshop *googles* the only one im seeing is the 17thC Balestrino crossbow but thats not a proper crossbow, thats a toy

@Tod’s Workshop Any chance you can make a video on you making that theoretical crossbow?