My theories [about swords]

Egae · Post by **Egae** » Wed May 14, 2003 4:03 pm

Alright, here I will be posting my theories and opinions on the Universe, life and everything. I'd appreciate your thoughts on what I put here (although, physically coming to my house and killing me in my sleep isn;t too hot in my books)
Since I have very little time, I'll just post one right now. And please, not stoning.

Theory 1): Katana vs. Broardsword

I believe that the broardsword produces better all-round fighters than the katana.
Please, hold thefirebombs for a moment and hear me out.
The katana is the greatest hand to hand weapon every created in craftsmanhip, taking days of hard labour to create a single one, while the broardsword is much, much, much plainer in comparison, lacking the style and the elegance. However, a point people tend to forget is that the katana is primarily a duelling weapon, a weapon which it's main strength is it's lightness and agility. The broardsword is simply a weapon of war (there were a few duels after the middle ages with broardswords, but those were mainly for training and profit), designed to let a man punch through full plate sarmour and still cause a killing blow. It is also much heavier than a katana, this means that the wielder must be in top physical condition to use it for mostly hours on end, while the katana can be used by pretty much anyway.
Ok, maybe a bad choice of words.
Anway, I have heard so many kids saying that "Oh, a samurai could kick anyone's ass in any sort of fight anywhere." And this is primarily what this theory is trying to disaprove, samurais were great SWORDSMEN, and they devoted their lives to mantaining their prowess with their katana and other weapons (primarily wakazashi, spear and occasionally bow), but put them in a straight bare fist fight with a middle a european vetran who uses a broardsword day after day and you will see a different battle.
Of course, that is pretty situational.
My conclusion to this (possibly faulty) theory is that while the katana is an incredible weapon, it trains prowess in the ways to fight with it, while the broardsword merely builds the users physical characteristics (strength from wielding the weapon often leads to speed when not using it), thus building a better all round warrior, rather than just a plain out-and-out swordsmen.

any views?

Kamoc · Post by **Kamoc** » Wed May 14, 2003 4:09 pm

Propyro · Post by **Propyro** » Wed May 14, 2003 4:17 pm

also, you should keep in mind the knights that could afford it often had training armor and weapons what usualy weighed around double what their actual fighting gear weighed, though i'm sure samuris practiced with weapons that were heavier then their actual combat weapons too.

But i wouldn't be so sure that just because a midevil european is loaded with brute strength that he can beat any samuri in hand to hand combat. Because i've seen guys who look like brutes get their asses decimated by little "short-shits". I'm sure any good Samuri would learn how to fight with his hands effectifly any ways, besides Asia had/has lots of insane H2H fighting arts that would definitly lay your average brutish eupopean to waste.

Jebadia · Post by **Jebadia** » Wed May 14, 2003 4:57 pm

Also, the general design of a Katana is much more better than the Broadsword. Where the broadsword is a single piece of metal hammered into a blade, the katana is several sheets of metal folded over and over in layers. Also the katana's arch/curve allowes it to absorb more stress, so you could very well take one

Also, it wasn't mostly used in duels. It was often used in many battles, and was actually a more merciful weapon to use than the broadsword, were the broadsword was more of a hacking weapon, the katana was a slicing/pearcing weapon which often made very clean cuts. I read that in some instances a cut would be so clean that a soldier was struck in the neck and the blood flowing out of his neck could make a whistling sound, which in most cases was the most favored way to die for most soldiers, cause there wasn't very much pain. There was also a type of katana made where the blade was much longer. Best used in night battles, a soldier could beat his opponent in a forest area by holding the blade strait up, facing the enemy. The enemy would miss judge the length of the blade easily and get struck down in one nasty blow because he got too close.

As for hand to hand combat, how many knights have you ever heard of that could break several layers of slate with their head/hands? Though I don't know that much about martial arts,(and sword so if any of the info above was wrong please correct me) but some of the things I've seen in documentaries would just frighten me to go up agaist anyone with some sort of Asian combat training, where some of the most inventive ways of killing a person has been discovered. One documentary showed a guy who could bust up wood by kicking it with his big toe. If he were to just kick you once..just once in the head..you'd die...

Propyro · Post by **Propyro** » Wed May 14, 2003 7:35 pm

Jebadia wrote: As for hand to hand combat, how many knights have you ever heard of that could break several layers of slate with their head/hands? Though I don't know that much about martial arts,(and sword so if any of the info above was wrong please correct me) but some of the things I've seen in documentaries would just frighten me to go up agaist anyone with some sort of Asian combat training, where some of the most inventive ways of killing a person has been discovered. One documentary showed a guy who could bust up wood by kicking it with his big toe. If he were to just kick you once..just once in the head..you'd die...

don't discount the europeans too much ... i'd like to see you say that to a Visgoth barbarian ... who understands english ... Or a Celtic Warrior from Ceasers time ... man those guys were brutal and strong. But interms of hand to hand fighting ... it would probalby be very similar to what you would see on WWE ... just not fake and much more interesting.

Flint the Dwarf · Post by **Flint the Dwarf** » Wed May 14, 2003 7:40 pm

I agree with Kamoc.

skanks · Post by **skanks** » Wed May 14, 2003 8:24 pm

flint_the_dwarf wrote:I agree with Kamoc.

that soccer players keep confusing their carriers with that of a stripper?

etto.. all round Warriors? A Swords man trains to fight with a sword, whats the point of getting to swordsman then telling them to go at it with bare hands.. its like gettings 2 of the best marksmen and tell them to kill each other using spoons.

And, it depends on the time of Samurai Sword we are talking about, some are made so huge they cut thru the horse aswell as the rider. I have a broudsword at home and I can weild that very easily (although I do have a big build though)
Strength isn't the only thing in a fight aswell, alot of it is speed, although in my fights the only benifit their speed had was then they ran away... School yards are different i'm guessing.. or hoping.. had some pretty pathetic fights back at school..

Propyro · Post by **Propyro** » Wed May 14, 2003 8:51 pm

skanks wrote: Strength isn't the only thing in a fight aswell, alot of it is speed, although in my fights the only benifit their speed had was then they ran away... School yards are different i'm guessing.. or hoping.. had some pretty pathetic fights back at school..

yea i had some pretty pathetic school yard fights .. in fact i ahd about 5 straight years of them ... since 12 on 1 is not very good odds ... for a while i was just about the fastest kid in school, then those bastards stopped trying to kill me ... damn it was i ever a good runner when i was a kid.

kthulhu · Post by **kthulhu** » Wed May 14, 2003 8:58 pm

skanks wrote:I have a broudsword at home and I can weild that very easily (although I do have a big build though)

I'm surprised your government hasn't banned that as well

. Next up is Oreos like what is going on in California.

Anyhow, Aussie ribbing aside, I'd say the katana is a better weapon, due to its light weight, agility, and sharpness. Why are these good? The sharpness allows for some precision penetration, while the light weight can theoretically allow more control (i.e. swinging back for another stroke if you miss or mess up the first one is probably faster with a katana than with a heavy broadsword).

Of course, projection weapons rule all with me, so take my opinion with a grain of salt...

Jebadia · Post by **Jebadia** » Wed May 14, 2003 9:19 pm

Propyro wrote:
Jebadia wrote: As for hand to hand combat, how many knights have you ever heard of that could break several layers of slate with their head/hands? Though I don't know that much about martial arts,(and sword so if any of the info above was wrong please correct me) but some of the things I've seen in documentaries would just frighten me to go up agaist anyone with some sort of Asian combat training, where some of the most inventive ways of killing a person has been discovered. One documentary showed a guy who could bust up wood by kicking it with his big toe. If he were to just kick you once..just once in the head..you'd die...
don't discount the europeans too much ... i'd like to see you say that to a Visgoth barbarian ... who understands english ... Or a Celtic Warrior from Ceasers time ... man those guys were brutal and strong. But interms of hand to hand fighting ... it would probalby be very similar to what you would see on WWE ... just not fake and much more interesting.

good point.