blocks are done with the back or sides of a katana leaving the untempered edge sharp, and katanas are anything but fragile, the soft back and mixed steel give impressive strength throughout the blade. As a final note most European plate was made very light and only covered the torso and head with some chainmail covering the squishy parts if you are lucky, the heavy full plate we see in games and movies was only worn by those on horses and a fall from his steed meant certain death.Daystar Clarion said:
Poll: What is your favourite kind of sword?
- Thread starter Saladfork
- Start date
Recommended Videos
If I only have a sword give me a decent infantry saber. Good Balance and quality and I can move fast with it. With a shield I want something a little heavier but still light, so broadsword in that case. For having used longswords I find them too cumbersome for my taste.
The Katana as we often picture it also comes from a later time period than the medieval weaponry, so yeah it is a better quality. However when compared to, say, a napoleonic infantry sabre. You'll get a pretty similar quality blade.2733 said:
Spot on about the armour too, most infantry would be lucky to even have chainmail, let alone full plate. Also the samurai would aim for limbs rather than torso shots most of the time, since its an easy kill and you avoid dulling your blade on armour. So the knight has a pretty good chance of being fucked. The shield throws a nice curveball into the equation though.
Hard to say. I love so many, though I am more of a polearm man (give me a poleaxe or shortspear any day). That said...bastard sword. All but one advantage of the long sword (they're awkward to use with a shield), and they're designed to open up the full versatility of half-swording (most swords can be, including longswords and katanas, but bastard swords are designed for it).
If I got a hipster choice...toss-up between a kukri or a tsurugi. The former because it's a chopping sword, the latter because I like screwing with expectations.
Depends on armor type (or even unarmored combat), of course, but not as much as one would expect. For unarmored combat, anything would do all right, but a katana, rapier, or other fast weapon would shine slightly more. For combat with full plate armor...don't use a sword, unless it's your only option.
Most poignant quote:
"There is so much unnecessary emotion encountered when fervent proponents of one or the other schools of swordsmanship speculates wildly on this topic. Amusingly, before reflexively reacting with a strong opinion one way or another when thinking about this subject, we might want to stop and ask ourselves to ponder the same imaginary contest between two samurai, for example, a Muromachi era versus say, a Kamakura one. Or we could do the same for the knight, posing the problem of who would defeat whom, an 11th century Flemish knight or a 14th century Burgundian one? By doing this simple mental exercise we can see the inherent problems of arguing one way or another over such imaginary fights. "
If I got a hipster choice...toss-up between a kukri or a tsurugi. The former because it's a chopping sword, the latter because I like screwing with expectations.
No sword is made for "slicing through armor," Japanese or European; that's the point of armor. Katanas and longswords aren't much different in that regard, or in how their wielders dealt with armored opponents: either attack unarmored spots or armor joints, or get in close and pick a different weapon (a good knife or a decent flanged mace, preferably).dave1004 said:
Depends on armor type (or even unarmored combat), of course, but not as much as one would expect. For unarmored combat, anything would do all right, but a katana, rapier, or other fast weapon would shine slightly more. For combat with full plate armor...don't use a sword, unless it's your only option.
<url=http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm>Fun reading.Daystar Clarion said:
Most poignant quote:
"There is so much unnecessary emotion encountered when fervent proponents of one or the other schools of swordsmanship speculates wildly on this topic. Amusingly, before reflexively reacting with a strong opinion one way or another when thinking about this subject, we might want to stop and ask ourselves to ponder the same imaginary contest between two samurai, for example, a Muromachi era versus say, a Kamakura one. Or we could do the same for the knight, posing the problem of who would defeat whom, an 11th century Flemish knight or a 14th century Burgundian one? By doing this simple mental exercise we can see the inherent problems of arguing one way or another over such imaginary fights. "
A few things more...
- Versatility and broad- long- bastard- swords.
Don't forget guys, that in the past one of most important formation in army was cavalry. It's no secret and no coincidence that best blades for cavalry were usually curved.
So i wouldn't be that quick to pick straight sword over sabre or scimitar because of "versatility".
- Also, from time to time we forget that battles were fought in different times, different places, between different people with different set of rules (or no rules at all). Some weapons are now considered "best" only because we have for example knights or samurais in mind when talking about them. For example - long, heavy blades with long reach were useless in let's say tavern brawls or on board of pirate ships. And vice-versa, dagger, stiletto or tanto in the middle of battle fought between thousands of soldiers = bad idea.
- "My precious" syndrome.
Let's say you have unique, one of it's kind, worth 10 or 15 villages katana, passed to you by your ancestors and simple, cheap yet reliable blade you can buy everywhere. You wander some less taken, mountain path and you're suddenly attacked by two ruffians wearing fur armors, and swinging crude, primitive weapons like axes or maybe maces.
Which of your two weapons would you use against them ? Remeber, that even though you're skilled fencer, there is always a possiblity that you'r foot will slip, one of villains may wear a piece of stolen aromor inderneath of his rags or there's a hidden archer somewhere - you never know for sure what fate has in store for you...
While on that - would you really take your precious, very expensive and unique weapon with you or leave it in safety of your stronghold ?
Just my 5 cents.
- Versatility and broad- long- bastard- swords.
Don't forget guys, that in the past one of most important formation in army was cavalry. It's no secret and no coincidence that best blades for cavalry were usually curved.
So i wouldn't be that quick to pick straight sword over sabre or scimitar because of "versatility".
- Also, from time to time we forget that battles were fought in different times, different places, between different people with different set of rules (or no rules at all). Some weapons are now considered "best" only because we have for example knights or samurais in mind when talking about them. For example - long, heavy blades with long reach were useless in let's say tavern brawls or on board of pirate ships. And vice-versa, dagger, stiletto or tanto in the middle of battle fought between thousands of soldiers = bad idea.
- "My precious" syndrome.
Let's say you have unique, one of it's kind, worth 10 or 15 villages katana, passed to you by your ancestors and simple, cheap yet reliable blade you can buy everywhere. You wander some less taken, mountain path and you're suddenly attacked by two ruffians wearing fur armors, and swinging crude, primitive weapons like axes or maybe maces.
Which of your two weapons would you use against them ? Remeber, that even though you're skilled fencer, there is always a possiblity that you'r foot will slip, one of villains may wear a piece of stolen aromor inderneath of his rags or there's a hidden archer somewhere - you never know for sure what fate has in store for you...
While on that - would you really take your precious, very expensive and unique weapon with you or leave it in safety of your stronghold ?
Just my 5 cents.
all those swords that became obsolete in real life because the invention of firearms and later trench warfare made them completely irrelevant in any kind of actual combat and holy shit you people
What are you, American or something ? Aw f*ck... You really are...TheSentinel said:
Neverthless, you should be ashamed of not knowing history of your own country.
Gettysburg
http://www.historicalimagebank.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=1273&g2_serialNumber=2
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/07/02/article-0-0133E293000004B0-43_468x319.jpg
Also, swords and long bladed knives were used in 'Nam.
How about something to eat Big Brother, yo ?TheSentinel said:
http://graeme.woaf.net/otherbits/jellypics/jelly_set.jpg
Katana, mainly because samurais are awesome.
Secondly because I have one in real life to be prepared for the zombie outbreak.
Secondly because I have one in real life to be prepared for the zombie outbreak.
TheSentinel said:
Also the topic was clearly what your favorite sword was, not their military application today. Go troll somewhere else.
OH DIP, Jack fuckin Churchill. Sorry, but one (admittedly seriously fuckin badass) dude ain't doin much to sway the whole "swords are completely goddamn irrelevant in the modern world. and when posts like
happen you know the thread is beyond hopeWhite_Lama said:
I don't really know much anything about fighting with a sword, so I guess I'd go with the biggest possible option.
Scottish Lowlander Claymore [http://www.gothicfantasy.com/Swords/13Z2065.htm], anyone?
Scottish Lowlander Claymore [http://www.gothicfantasy.com/Swords/13Z2065.htm], anyone?
...But you play video games and you're aware that concepts of strength and stamina are rooted in reality. ;pKarhukonna said:
Also, try "buster sword" in google images. Yes, we can !
I was kinda going for realism there. If fictional weapons are involved, look no further.JesterRaiin said:Also, try "buster sword" in google images. Yes, we can !
asstastic 90s[/youtube]
Yeah it shoots swords.
Honestly, I am not a big fan of swords. It is a pity that in video games, and in fiction in general, other weapons do not receive nearly the exposure they deserve. Especially the halberd, the spear and the mace.
Staying on topic: The Gladius, that sting has style.
Staying on topic: The Gladius, that sting has style.
No problem my good man !Karhukonna said:I was kinda going for realism there.JesterRaiin said:Also, try "buster sword" in google images. Yes, we can !
<spoiler=Koncerz>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koncerz
http://dessinateur.d.e.pic.centerblog.net/1peizqj2.jpg
<spoiler=Estoc>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoc
http://www.peterfiner.com/assets/Uploads/german-estoc-1550-03.jpg
<spoiler=i attached this image once, but awwwwhell : nodachi>http://s1.ifotos.pl/img/topkapisk_qapxxp.jpg
http://bagua-zhang.com/Geschichte/xiepeiqi_sword.jpg
As i recall, pretty much every DnD based game was full of maces, axes, halberds.Traun said:
Even in Skyrim swords aren't only possible solution.
There's a strong probability that it's us, the gamers who are more interested in certain weapons and developers simply tag along.