Setting Matseps, Hazmit Fields, and Dagger-Spears.

[Madman Starryteller]

Hey, just wanted to see what people think of this setting.

In my universe, most fights take place in close range with bladed weapons that are able to strike or cut through almost any matter and energy. These bladed weapons are called Material or Matter Separators, or Matseps.

They come in many forms, such as short swords, long swords, daggers, spears, axes, and dagger-spears. Dagger-spears are daggers whose handle have a sort of button you can press to shoot out a long bar to form the dagger into a spear.

Hazard Mitigation fields, or Hazmit Fields, are fields that protects the user against incoming dangers, such as viruses, toxins, fire, plasma, gunfire, etc. They emanate from a small object. The more fields in one place, the stronger they get. Hence, close formations. The fields are invisible to the eye.

Together this creates a setting where people in a very, very, very advanced civilisation fight close quarters. These battles can range over continents, with billions involved. (Yeah I went bonkers with scale, but for a good story reason.) Even in space battles, ramming and boarding enemy vessels is preferred.

I wanted to make it this way, because I think it makes the story far more personal.

Thoughts about the setting? Edit, critical views of the setting are welcomed. Do you roll your eyes in disbelief, or do you think the setting is built on a good enough foundation?

 

[Naomasa298]

I think I would struggle with hazard mitigation fields. There's nothing in common between viruses and gunfire that a single physical phenomenon can mitigate, so it comes across as magic, and a little hand-waving.

Matter separators I can understand - a field that breaks bonds between atoms. I can grasp that as a pseudo-scientific explanation.

 

[Madman Starryteller]

Appreciate the feedback @Naomasa298

In my current draft I just mention what they are and only a little how they work.

I'm imagining that that the Hazmit field is a defensive layer composed of many different technologies, one of which are nano machines, who, simply put, try to neutralize dangers as they approach, along with a sort of energy shield that slows down projectiles and such.

As to the blades, yeah, they basically break whatever bond holds together the atoms. But they don't cleave atoms (since that could cause a nuclear explosion in some circumstances).

 

[Homer Potvin]

Have you read Dune? That's essentially how they fight in that setting, shields and blades. The reason is that their firearm technology, called lasguns, causes nuclear explosions when it interacts with their shield technology. Hence, no guns and all blades.

 

[Madman Starryteller]

Have you read Dune? That's essentially how they fight in that setting, shields and blades. The reason is that their firearm technology, called lasguns, causes nuclear explosions when it interacts with their shield technology. Hence, no guns and all blades.

I haven't read it yet, but it is on my list. I'm a big Dune fan, though, from the movies and recent tv series. I wanted close fighting long before I knew about Dune, though. I wanted it ever since I started this project 10+ years ago.

The difference is that I still want ranged weapons to be somewhat viable. They can still be used to overwhelm the Hazmit Fields.

But yeah, Dune is becoming a huge inspiration for me.

 

[Homer Potvin]

I haven't read it yet, but it is on my list. I'm a big Dune fan, though, from the movies and recent tv series. I wanted close fighting long before I knew about Dune, though. I wanted it ever since I started this project 10+ years ago.

The difference is that I still want ranged weapons to be somewhat viable. They can still be used to overwhelm the Hazmit Fields.

But yeah, Dune is becoming a huge inspiration for me.

I'd definitely check it out first just to see how they handle it. The mechanic is kind of Sci-Fi canon, on par with lightsabers in the Star Wars. It's introduced very early in the first book, so it's not like you need to dive deep into all seven.

 

[DLC]

Yeah, Dune's the first thing that came to mind. You might want to look at why they fought that way.

 

[That Guy Named Aaron]

And nobody in this setting has the IQ points to develop archery or items with shrapnel?

 

[Madman Starryteller]

And nobody in this setting has the IQ points to develop archery or items with shrapnel?

Hehe. The idea is that these Matsep blades are very difficult to make and are more of a generational heirloom. A blade can be passed down for millions of years. They are forged with the aid of black holes, and every batch, I imagine, takes a while to form.

Shrapnel exists like in every war. But the Hazmit Field slows it down and then people wear armour as a second layer of defence, which makes shrapnel pretty harmless for a prepared and well-equipped soldier.

 

[Kiraann]

Matsep, hazmit - sounds like technobabble. What’s wrong with plain “energy sword” or “force field”?

How these work shouldn’t be that important to your stories unless you are writing a twist, just that they do work.

 

[Madman Starryteller]

Matsep, hazmit - sounds like technobabble. What’s wrong with plain “energy sword” or “force field”?

How these work shouldn’t be that important to your stories unless you are writing a twist, just that they do work.

They're really just wordplay contractions of their original descriptive names. I did not think that would be classified as technobabble. Thought technobabble was more for long sentences of pseudo science.

Energy sword wouldn't really fit what they are. They don't glow, nor do they require energy to work.

The Hazmit Field is also more than just a force field, so that would not fit either.

I just hope the terms will be memorable technobabble.

 

[Naomasa298]

I just hope the terms will be memorable technobabble.

Hazmit sounds rather too much like hazmat, I reckon.

 

[Madman Starryteller]

Hazmit sounds rather too much like hazmat, I reckon.

I've had similar concerns. But in the end, I think that if I use Hazmit enough (without overdoing it) in the stories, readers will hopefully become more used to the term.

Edit: Matsep also seems to be the medical term for Maternal Separation, but I think only doctors and nurses will react to my usage of it in the stories. If a doctor or nurse ever reads my stories that is.

 

[Stuart Dren]

I think your terms are fine. The issues of "why not drones/artillery" and "why not projectiles" are always tricky in that kind of setting. Frankly most military sci fi doesn't even address why their military tactics sometimes end up being more primitive than WW2 doctrine. A lack of resources is often cited, however, which is indeed a believable catch-all.

What is stopping someone from breaking down a matsep blade into bullets or arrow tips, or forging one that way in the first place? Is it the material or the whole/form that gives the blade its properties?

Does the heft of an axe grant better material separation, making its weight a justified trade-off?

If billions of combatants are taking part in these wars, these blades are also not that rare. Though if it takes longer to produce a matsep blade than it does a soldier, then capturing the blades from fallen foes will quickly take priority.

Why wouldn't I just put ten hasmit field emitters in my pocket?

Coming up with a hard rationale for every scenario or work-around is fine, and it will be impressive if it's elegant, but it will take a lot of thought.

Judging from just the utilitarian catch-all description of the hasmit fields, they don't come across as fully conceptualized. I think a reciprocating thought process bouncing between the strengths and weaknesses of any weapons and hasmit shields that naturally lands on melee in majority but not all cases would feel better. The result though would be that sometimes projectiles and artillery are the better answer for a pitched battle. In short: compromise.