Poll: Swords or Guns?
- Thread starter Antitonic
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Either or. I say it would depend on my situation. I'd prefer to have a pistol+knife combo that allows you to go back and forth. Knives won't do crap from long range, but a gun's not going to help very much at close range. It will, but not as effectively as a knife against someone right up on your balls.
Swords. They're silent, reliable, much more maneuverable, and assuming you have a decently-crafted one they're extremely durable. Guns by definition are prone to all the potential faults of any machine.
(Not that I'm saying I would absolutely refuse to use a gun if given the option...I'm fairly handy with a pistol. But if either choice is reasonably viable, I'll stick to my blades.)
(Not that I'm saying I would absolutely refuse to use a gun if given the option...I'm fairly handy with a pistol. But if either choice is reasonably viable, I'll stick to my blades.)
For a certain point of view you are correct, but then given that there is a great deal more skill involved in swordplay I would say it is less honourable, after all, where is the honour in a highly skilled swordsman cutting down 100 novices? The gun is a great equaliser, not to say there is no skill involved because there certainly is but even a novice can gun down an expert marksman if he gets the drop on him. I call that fair and fair = honourable.Rarhnor said:
there is always the machine pistol. You with a knife, me with a machine pistol, any day - as close as you like.ExiusXavarus said:
How about both? I'd go with either a 9mm Beretta or perhaps a .357 Magnum to take care of any and all bad guys who are further than 10 meters away, and use two swords, katanas maybe, to kill anyone foolish enough to try to get close.
probably ninja'd but..
http://www.myimportstore.com/store/images/Accessories/gunblade.jpg
(please embed, i don't know how nyoro~
http://www.myimportstore.com/store/images/Accessories/gunblade.jpg
(please embed, i don't know how nyoro~
by what do you mean "less effective" in situations which those weapons were designed for, yes. swords in general were much more versatile than many other weapons, even though they did not excel in the areas those other weapons did. there are numerous forms combat can take, and among ancient weapons, the sword could be used in many of them comparatively well. the axe is generally slower than the sword, the spear has a wooden shaft that can be broken with a heavy blow, the bow and crossbow are next to useless at melee range. each weapon has it's specific strengths and weaknesses, but the sword is less pronounced in either category. the swords were usually in a "jack of all trades" class.Souplex said:
I find that my preference varies depending on design, execution, and my mood (which usually changes with the weather). In all honesty, though, I usually prefer primarily weaponless combat, because it doesn't matter how good you are with a gun OR a sword, Riki-oh can still punch you in half from across the room (especially now that he's learned the ultimate secrets of kung-fu from whales in a cave underneath the north pole. He can also kill immortals who can control space and time and heal from any injury between scenes).
I also like unusual weapons, like the paintbrush from Okami.
I also like unusual weapons, like the paintbrush from Okami.
Van Gogh shot himself in the chest. It took him 2 days to die. Stab a guy once and you've essential disabled him for the final strike. Yeah you can shoot a guy, but unless it's a direct head shot, he can use the last once of adrenaline he has in his body to pull the trigger on you.Omikron009 said:
Look at my DP. Now look back. That's my answer.
Guns are for pussies who want to solve their problems from a distance. They allow people who don't know how to fight the ability to kill people without really being brave. Guns in the untrained hands can also send stray bullets into innocent bystanders, causing reasonless death. Swords on the other hand are the most personal way to combat a man one on one, face to face. No innocent bystanders can get hit by crossfire. And if you are unskilled with the sword, only you die. That's the most honourable way of fighting.
Guns are for pussies who want to solve their problems from a distance. They allow people who don't know how to fight the ability to kill people without really being brave. Guns in the untrained hands can also send stray bullets into innocent bystanders, causing reasonless death. Swords on the other hand are the most personal way to combat a man one on one, face to face. No innocent bystanders can get hit by crossfire. And if you are unskilled with the sword, only you die. That's the most honourable way of fighting.
My preference is what I ever I have available, mostly cause Have been taught how to turn just about anything into a weapon by my father (The man beat me in a fight with a dish towel and colander, I shit you not) I do prefer however to go with nondescript objects that could be used to kill in a way that ti looks like an accident. Attack me and I have a pen, I will flail and in the process jab it in your neck. Looks like an accident in the heat of the moment and I used an object that i happened to have in my hand (I keep my hands in my pockets normally)
There is no honour in killing a person, get that fool notion out of your head. Be it from a gun or a sword, you are snuffing a life. A life hat may have had a family, a life that may have been loved by others. You have taken the life of someone that could have been just like you, could have been a friend if you were not on opposing sides of a conflict.AzrealMaximillion said:
