1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
3) Best Side Arm
4) Coolest Looking
5) Best Stabbing
6) Best Slashing
Wasn't the Katana particularly good at cutting the ties that held Japanese armour together. Not great at penetrating the armour itself, but it was effect against the armour of the time. Probably would not be as effective against full plate or many of the European armours.
Against European full plate if you had to use a sword you'd probably want the biggest sword you can wield, because by weight and power alone it would buckle the armour, reducing the opponents freedom of movement. If you could bring the point down on a toppled knight the extra weight would help penetrate. Still as you've pointed out a sword probably wasn't the ideal weapon to fight a guy in full plate with.
2) Any sword is pretty good against infantry. A sabre works best if you are mounted however as the curve of the blade helps prevent it getting caught on you victim as you ride past.
3) pass.
4) matter of taste.
5) I would have thought a rapier at least if your target isn't in armour.
6) pass, although curve blades tend to cut better than straight ones.
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
Dopplehander, while half-sworded.
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
Pretty much anything as long as you get passed the polearms.
3) Best Side Arm
Anything.
4) Coolest Looking
Damascus scimitar.
5) Best Stabbing
See #1
6) Best Slashing
See #4
2) If mounted as has been said a calvary sabre is very good; other wise against an unarmored target almost anything is very effective assuming you can reach your target.
3) Various types of daggers would be handy.
4) Personal Preference.
5) The Roman Gladius was pretty damn good at stabbing, although part of that was the tactics used.
6) A curved blade is going to be superior as it makes the blade "effectively sharper" giving it more cutting power. Which sword is best overall is hard to rank in this catagory due to the fact that most swords ever made fall in this category(slashing). IF I had to make a guess it would be scimitar or katana.
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
-A zweihander or another big sword.
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
-Probably a scimitar or another durable curved blade.
3) Best Side Arm
-I like dirks, best parts of a dagger and a shortsword.
4) Coolest Looking
-Longsword (actual, think bastard sword)
5) Best Stabbing
-Rapier or zweihander.
6) Best Slashing
-Katana, as much as I dislike katanas.
Two Handed Broadsword (Greatsword in DnD Terms), a very effective means to burst chain links.
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
Heavy Cavalry Saber, used by Cavalry up until WW1 pretty much, ideal for chopping down unarmored foes on the ground.
3) Best Side Arm
The Roman Gladius is the perfect Army Sword, especially when used with proper Legion Tactics. It was designed to be used in extremely close quarters with people on all sides of you. Though it was a "side arm" because first you used your Pilum (spear) which would stick into an enemy shield, weigh them down and force them to discard it.
4) Coolest Looking
Katana's are my favorite in this respect, they're just so nice looking.
5) Best Stabbing
Also, Roman Gladius
6) Best Slashing
Katana's also fit really well into this respect, a sword that was designed to cleave flesh is the ideal slashing weapon.
On the down side to use them properly you have to wear almost no armor. Make shure you get your guy because if he hits you with that bastard sword your gone....
2. Depends on the infantry and if you're mounted or not.
3. Gladius.
4. Any type of sword can look cool if well made and weilded correctly. Any type can look daft if these conditions are not met.
5. A proper military rapier.
6. Scimitar (probably).
Now, onto the questions:
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
No, they don't. And the templar sword.
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
Single person, or mass combat?
Single - Rapier.
Mass - Scottish basket-hilt claymore.
3) Best Side Arm
I'm assuming you mean a bladed sidearm. If anachronism in regards tothe other weaponry I've listed doesn't matter, then a Kukri.
4) Coolest Looking
Sword-sized katar. Reference Willow, Eric's sword.
5) Best Stabbing
Once again, rapier.
6) Best Slashing
Hmm, my preference in a fight if I'm wielding the weapon would be saber, medium length.
Katana is an awesome sword but rather flimsy in the hands of someone untrained. Don't get me wrong if a chap snags one up and tries to slash you with one it would definitley not be pretty. But if someone was to try to cut through bone or armor without the proper cut developed from training you can easily bend or destroy your blade. One important factor is when one cuts with most european blades you rather hack, while a katana usually you drag the cut from handle to tip. It's a very precise yet deadly weapon.
The gladius is a very interesting weapon in that it was the weapon that almost conquered half the known world under the romans if I remember right. Also a short sword like weapon is extremley versatile as any escrima practioner can tell you.
I once heard a special on the history channel that said that if a heavily armored knight could survive the first attack from an Iaido practitioner than there was a good chance that he would beat him. That sounds like a bit much, but I will say this; the medieval knight learned from masters and had an art just like the samurai did. The only reason that we see so much eastern martial arts today is because they still kept their tradition alive to modern day times. Meanwhile in Europe, once gunpowder developed, much of medieval swordsmanship slowly winked out of existance.
Think of it this way; in the 1600's we were sailing the 7 seas and fighting the indians (and each other) with rifles and canon in the america's while the Japanese were in their fuedal samurai prime (Tokugawa shogunate era), still using swords though guns were being introduced to them by europeans.
In the 1800s we had cowboys and gunfighters, gatling guns and the japanese were also still using katana (though they were just being introduced on civil war era warfare tactics) See the Last Samurai, though an exagerated movie about a historical fact. Japanese people heavily resisted change from their old ways and thus their art far outlived the now dead medieval forms. But medieval forms and techniques did exist, and I think that the knight and his fighting style should not be overlooked and being inferior to the samurai.
so;
1) Anti-Armored ---- two handers or small dirks and daggers that can bet between the cracks.
2) Anti-Infantry -----bayonet or short swords with manueverability
3) Best Side Arm ----Berreta 40 cal! but seriously.., probably a good dagger to me the k-bar
4) Coolest Looking ---Bastard Sword, or long sword.., especially with shield.
5) Best Stabbing ---- the rapier > Long live the muskateers!
6) Best Slashing ----An axe but for swords probably a two hander or great sword. With training a katana.
Hammers and axes are great vs. heavy armored foes, though a bit heavy usually and not quite as flexible for maneuverability imho.
See the Last Samurai, though an exagerated movie about a historical fact. Japanese people heavily resisted change from their old ways and thus their art far outlived the now dead medieval forms.
You had a decent enough point going up until here. Started falling apart though when you mentioned how forearms were only being introduced in the Tokugawa era.
They were actually introduced much, much earlier, and were the preferred weapon of war for anyone who could afford large numbers of them.
All these katana threads got me thinking: "What's the best sword?" I drew the conclusion that there is no TEH BESTERZ SWORD WITH H4XX0R PWRZ, but there is a best sword for each cattegory. So, Let's vote on our opinion as the best sword for each category:
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
3) Best Side Arm
4) Coolest Looking
5) Best Stabbing
6) Best Slashing
1) Depends on the armour. If you take full steel plate, the bastard sword was probably best. You had the weight to really make an impression if you didn't penetrate, and the point to make it through with a really good thrust.
2) Katana. It's the most efficient cutting edge around, if you are also on foot. From horseback, the best sword is NOT the sabre (too duel purpose, not good enough at either) or scimitar (could not thrust) - but a thrusting sword developed by the British at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries: it had an offset hilt so that the blade made a straight line with the arm when thrust, and was employed like a lance in the charge, but could be used to slash and stab normally as well.
3) Define side arm? If you mean small sword, for confined spaces it would be the cutless or the ninjato. If you mean defensive weapon, katana is rated by most as the best all-round personal weapon of the pre-firearm age.
4) Katana, but that's subjective.
5) Epee or gee (Chinese sword).
6) Katana.
As an aside, the katana could not generally cut through more than a broadsword could ... but it could do it much faster. Facing an identical target two swordsman (one with broasdword, one with katana) made four cuts to slice through it. Both did them, but the katana finished in half the time.
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
The Zwiehander was designed to break pikes and halberds but was also quite effective at chopping up armored fighters.
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
The Basket-hilted Broadsword particularly the Scottish claymore. The British had to develop special infantry tactics with the bayonet to defeat the oncoming highlanders as they charged with their claymores and targes. The sword is sometimes referred to as the "claybeg".
Once pikes and bayonets became popular, cavalry was mostly ineffective against infantry unless they were running away.
3) Best Side Arm
The Basket-hilted Claymore, also known as the "claybeg"...Hey I like 'em, okay?
4) Coolest Looking
The Basket-hilted claymore...ect, ect.
5) Best Stabbing
The Smallsword. I have had the opportunity to handle actual 18th century smallswords and they were so well balanced as to feel nearly weightless in the hand. I have found some rapiers to be extremely well balanced but their obscene length (some had blades longer than 40 inches!) to makes them useless once an opponent closed in.
6) Best Slashing
Curved blades worked best for this. Notably the katana, the saber, scimitar and yataghan.
You had a decent enough point going up until here. Started falling apart though when you mentioned how forearms were only being introduced in the Tokugawa era.
They were actually introduced much, much earlier, and were the preferred weapon of war for anyone who could afford large numbers of them.
Actually the first Westerner to visit Japan was a Portuguese merchant whose ship drifted ashore in 1543. The Portuguese introduced rifles to the Japanese, and within a short period of time, the Japanese were producing domestic rifles. So yeah it was a bit before Tokugawa shogunate officially started in 1603. The firearm changed the battle field strategies, yet samurai still depended highly on their traditional swordsmanship for three hundred years or so afterward. Meanwhile the rest of the world embraced and 'forgot' their old way of warfare with swords and spears.
I guess my point in all this though I did begin to ramble on :D , was that many people romanticize the Katana (and believe me I highly respect it being that I train in one of it's arts) over European swordsmanship, which very well could have been just as formadable..,
Being a light blade (1/2 lb-1 1/2 lbs), the Gladius was very versitile and easy to wield during long engagements.
The Gladius' major function was to deal stabbing wounds, usually from up-thrusts (under the ribs and into the lungs and/or heart).
The Gladius is a sleek, wicked-looking blade that, while it may not be massive and covered in spikes or smaller blades, posesses an intimidating character.
Though its function was primarily for stabbing, the Gladius could just as easily produce deep slashes on a foe. The majority of the sword was composed of a blade, with the handle being constructed for only one hand. The blades tended to be wide and stocky, ensuring that any slash with one would bite deep into its target.
During the time when it saw its widest distribution and use, the Gladius was one of the most feared weapon of its time.
Take care, friends.
I am a sword and weapons enthusiast and an instructor of fencing but I acknowledge that my answers are only my opinion and won't push my views onto any of you.
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
The Zwiehander was designed to break pikes and halberds but was also quite effective at chopping up armored fighters.
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
The Basket-hilted Broadsword particularly the Scottish claymore. The British had to develop special infantry tactics with the bayonet to defeat the oncoming highlanders as they charged with their claymores and targes. The sword is sometimes referred to as the "claybeg".
Once pikes and bayonets became popular, cavalry was mostly ineffective against infantry unless they were running away.
3) Best Side Arm
The Basket-hilted Claymore, also known as the "claybeg"...Hey I like 'em, okay?
4) Coolest Looking
The Basket-hilted claymore...ect, ect.
5) Best Stabbing
The Smallsword. I have had the opportunity to handle actual 18th century smallswords and they were so well balanced as to feel nearly weightless in the hand. I have found some rapiers to be extremely well balanced but their obscene length (some had blades longer than 40 inches!) to makes them useless once an opponent closed in.
6) Best Slashing
Curved blades worked best for this. Notably the katana, the saber, scimitar and yataghan.
Sorry if this sounds a bit condisending, but I've always been told (by historians and archeologists) that claymores were a type of greatsword, not a bastket-hilt broardsword. I doubt many people would be able to swing one of these in one hand with a shield in the other (although William Wallace did).
Sorry if this sounds a bit condisending, but I've always been told (by historians and archeologists) that claymores were a type of greatsword, not a bastket-hilt broardsword. I doubt many people would be able to swing one of these in one hand with a shield in the other (although William Wallace did).
This is the sword you are writing about:
This is the sword I was writing about:
Both swords were called "Claymore" by the Scots. The two handed variety was used from the late middle ages through the 1600's while the Basket hilt type, was used from about 1680 onwards. The Basket-hilt Claymore was often used with a shield called a targe shown below.
Here is an image of both Claymore and targe on display:
And here are some images of Highland swordsmen armed as above.
This is the sword you are writing about:
This is the sword I was writing about:
Both swords were called "Claymore" by the Scots. The two handed variety was used from the late middle ages through the 1600's while the Basket hilt type, was used from about 1680 onwards. The Basket-hilt Claymore was often used with a shield called a targe shown below.
Here is an image of both Claymore and targe on display:
And here are some images of Highland swordsmen armed as above.
That isn't a Claymore.
Claymore literally mean Great Sword, which is where WOTC got the term from. They stopped using 2 handed sword because that term came from Zweihande which was an attempt at an anti-rider sword anti-pike sword. It was in fact rubbish and never took off, so Great Sword, which is a good sword, is a better choice.
2) Entirely depends on tactics (realy so does 1). But I gess I'd give this title to the Gladius, as the Roman Empire did alot with it. Any weapon is good against infantry when used properly however.
3) Define side-arm. I prefer the M1911 colt myself. Or maybe the Single Action Army. As far as a blade goes,any dagger/knife is a good backup weapon.
4) Flamberge Zwiehander
5) Anything pointy (most swords are)
6) Anything curved, though a straight blade will still kill one target just as well.
All these katana threads got me thinking: "What's the best sword?" I drew the conclusion that there is no TEH BESTERZ SWORD WITH H4XX0R PWRZ, but there is a best sword for each cattegory. So, Let's vote on our opinion as the best sword for each category:
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
3) Best Side Arm
4) Coolest Looking
5) Best Stabbing
6) Best Slashing
1) Estocs perhaps. I don't know them in practice but they were designed as anti-armour swords.
2) I am not sure. Depends on your style. Katana would work, but lack durability. Most cutting blades with some thrusting ability suit this.
3) German two-handed longsword, they were prized for versitility and killing capability. They were very effective in most fights, bringing an advantage to nearly every fight.
4) Any sword can be made to look cool.
5) Depends on the target. Rapiers were developed for armourless foes in crowded or cramped quarters (urban combat), estocs were used to thrust through armour, but all-purpose stabbing I would say German longsword once again.
6) Depends on target again. Sheer slashing power alone would be katana, falchion for hacking through armoured foes, probably scimitar for effective all-purpose slashing.
That isn't a Claymore.
Claymore literally mean Great Sword, which is where WOTC got the term from. They stopped using 2 handed sword because that term came from Zweihande which was an attempt at an anti-rider sword anti-pike sword. It was in fact rubbish and never took off, so Great Sword, which is a good sword, is a better choice.
Wikipedia Claymore
Claymore is the word for both swords.
The Portuguese introduced rifles to the Japanese, and within a short period of time, the Japanese were producing domestic rifles.
Anyone else have a perverse mental image from "domestic rifle"?
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
3) Best Side Arm
4) Coolest Looking
5) Best Stabbing
6) Best Slashing
1) A real falchion is actually pretty good at this. They aren't huge, they were typically used one handed, but they are thick, and heavier than most swords.
2) It depends on what they are wielding. Against spears a claymore is decent, since their range advantage is reduced some.
3) A short sword, similar to the roman gladius. It worked for the greeks.
4) Damascus steel scimitar.
5) Nothing in particular here. It varies. For mounted warriors the saber is pretty good though.
6) Again nothing in particular. Both the saber and the scimitar are good for mounted warriors, I personally think the scimitar has a slight advantage.
1) Estocs perhaps. I don't know them in practice but they were designed as anti-armour swords.
Yes, estocs are great for getting between the plates of full plate armour - due to their diamond shaped cross section; however if there is maile between the plates, it's a little more difficult.
If you wanted to bash through heavy armour, you didn't take a sword. Period. Axes, maces, flails, picks, and certain polearms were designed for that. For the most part, such weapons don't begin to appear until after the advent of plate armour; if the edge of the sword were able to menace a man in armour, then there would have been no need for the development of specialized anti-armour weapons. Also, when plate armour appears on the scene, the profile of the sword begins to change, with acutely pointed designs optimized for thrusting into gaps in armour superceding the older, chopping form. See any of the works of Ewart Oakeshott for more on the evolution of sword blades after the advent of plate armour.
7) Best parrying sword (even though you really don't want to do this, 'cause it'll ruin the blade, but still).
New category:
7) Best parrying sword (even though you really don't want to do this, 'cause it'll ruin the blade, but still).
Estoc? Because there is no edge to ruin when you parry.
Langenschwert, because of the versitility of combat styles (one-handed, two-handed, half-sword) and the ability to reposte from so many angles.
Zweihander? Because of the greater reach allowing you more reaction time by keeping your foe further at bay?
Katzblager? Fast, single-handed sword which works with a shield.
NECRO POWAS ACTIVATE!
All these katana threads got me thinking: "What's the best sword?" I drew the conclusion that there is no TEH BESTERZ SWORD WITH H4XX0R PWRZ, but there is a best sword for each cattegory. So, Let's vote on our opinion as the best sword for each category:
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
3) Best Side Arm
4) Coolest Looking
5) Best Stabbing
6) Best Slashing
1) Falchion
2) Claymore
3) Dirk
4) Claymore
5) Gladius
6) Damascus Scimitar
7) Estoc
1) Anti-armour
The falx. While not technically a sword, it it still has enough of a blade to qualify IMO. The favourite weapon of the Dacians, it could cut a man in half length-wise with helmet, armour and all (bane of the Roman legionaires). If it doesn't qualify, Estoc as a close second.
2) Anti-infantry
This is what swords are designed for, so I'll assume you want one effective against several opponents? Zweihänder. Difficult to wield, but nice reach, heavy impact, and effective against most kinds of infantry.
3) Best Side Arm
Katzbalger. Cool-looking, versatile, decent size.
4) Coolest-Looking
Langschwert, or the so-called "Highland Claymore". Bastard Sword in D&D-speak.
5) Best Stabbing
Rapier. That's what it was made for, after all.
6) Best Slashing
Depends on craftsmanship, of course. Personal favourites include the katana and the Schiavona/Pappenheimer.
7) Best Parrying
Parrying what? In Renaissance duels (rapiers or foils), the Main-Gauche. With broad or arming swords, probably the Katzbalger. For war (parrying all kings of weapons at higher reach), again the Langschwert.
Best Swords
Gives more variety.
Any of the heavier fencing weapons. You'd want something that can slip in between the soft spots, or failing that, can be thrusted through, and pierce the armor. Wouldn't work as well against chain mail though, as there could be fewer weak spots, so then I'd want a something like a claymore to crush the bones beneath the armor.
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
Katana. Anything light, and wicked sharp would be just fine. The katana has length over some other anti-infantry weapons, which is a good thing. The kukri is an absolutely devastating weapon though, and has some of the punching power against heavier armored foes the katana lacks (but it is shorter, and thus isn't as good on the defense).
3) Best Side Arm
Stilleto. It's durable enough to be used defensively, can punch through armor with ease (this would be the most efficient anti-armor weapon), and while it lacks the edge you'd want for slashing, that's what your main weapon is for.
4) Coolest Looking
Falchion.
5) Best Stabbing
A fencing weapon. The Chinese straight sword was fairly long, and capable of stabbing.
6) Best Slashing
Scimitar. Lighter than a falchion, with a nice curve for more severe wounds vs. the katana.
7) Best Parrying
A fencing weapon, one without an edge. Or the sword-breaker.
During the time when it saw its widest distribution and use, the Gladius was one of the most feared weapon of its time.
It was also carried by a dense shield wall of well disciplined, heavily armored troops fighting primarily against people without the military coordination of the Romans. The Roman battleline was a meat grinder- enemies smash against the huge shields and heavy armor, and with them up close and packed together the short, hacking, gladius was a fantastic weapon.
Guess it would depend on the armor for one. I'll take the middle road and assume medium-esque armor I suppose. Shielded?
Longsword, no frills. Extra reach, 1 or 2 handing, not too heavy, good piercing. Ideally, I wouldn't want a sword. Good pike is preferable.
2) Anti-Infantry
The lighter variety? Again, shield or no?
Katana or cav sabre. Anything I can use 1-handed in a pinch, lighter, faster, nastier laceration. A serrated straight blade, longsword maybe, might fit the bill.
3) Best Side Arm
WWI trench knife, definetly.
4) Coolest Looking
Dao
5) Best Stabbing
Drusus or gladius maybe. Smaller (faster) usually gets it done.
6) Best Slashing
Naginata, maybe a falchion.
7) Best Parrying
What am I defending from, a 2-hander, foil, katana, dagger?
I guess a basket-hilted cutlass. Unsure, too broad a category.
Reg06: the short, hacking, gladius was a fantastic weapon.
It's designed for thrusts, not slashes namely. Less surface area to defend; hard to swing a good arc w/out compromising shield wall. Puncture is usually preferable to a laceration in most forms; nastier dmg, easier to implement.
It's designed for thrusts, not slashes namely. Less surface area to defend; hard to swing a good arc w/out compromising shield wall. Puncture is usually preferable to a laceration in most forms; nastier dmg, easier to implement.
Yes, very true. Still, whether it's hacking or stabbing the gladius's strength was in the well disciplined, heavy armored shield wall wielding the gladius.
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
3) Best Side Arm
4) Coolest Looking
5) Best Stabbing
6) Best Slashing
Personally I am a fan of the side-sword. It is not that talked about unfortunately since it was a mid-point development between the arming sword and the rapier. But damn is it nice, got a good point for stabbing and still thick enough and has sharp edges for slashing. Plus very pretty and light. To go really crazy too, a Damascus steel side-sword be awesome:
That one's beautiful. But yeah, Renaissance arming swords are awesome, they get all the nice artwork without being some sissy rapier or somesuch ;) . Love the Katzbalger, myself.
2.) Any sword is great against light infantry.
3.) I'd have to go with the dirk.
4.) Khopesh or scimitar.
5.) Rapier.
6.) A scimitar, due to the curve and the fact that it is slightly heavier than a sabre.
7.) Main Gauche, as it's actually designed for this.
Best all around sword Roman Gladius it was simple to use, and could find the soft spots in armour. It was also light weight enough to be quicker than any larger sword. Bigger isnt always better as they will see your swing coming.
It was also heavier than most swords of its size, not as good at hacking as other swords, and not the best at armor penetration. It was a great sword because it was used by Roman legionaires.
2) Pata. Stabby stabby. (Like a Katar, but long and thin like a shortsword, and integrated into a full gauntlet.)
3) Kukri. Stab your foe, cut your meat, or chop down a small tree.
4) Katar. Mmmm big metal claws.
5) Katar.
6) Pata. Had you entire forearm to add force to your swing.
There's a theme here.
Swords?
1) Katar. Stabby stabby. (Plant your feet and punch like a boxer. No weak bent wrist joint to lessen the force.)
2) Pata. Stabby stabby. (Like a Katar, but long and thin like a shortsword, and integrated into a full gauntlet.)
3) Kukri. Stab your foe, cut your meat, or chop down a small tree.
4) Katar. Mmmm big metal claws.
5) Katar.
6) Pata. Had you entire forearm to add force to your swing.
Kukiri required a lot of skill to use effectivley.
All these katana threads got me thinking: "What's the best sword?" I drew the conclusion that there is no TEH BESTERZ SWORD WITH H4XX0R PWRZ, but there is a best sword for each cattegory. So, Let's vote on our opinion as the best sword for each category:
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
3) Best Side Arm
4) Coolest Looking
5) Best Stabbing
6) Best Slashing
Everything but stabbing (though it's capable)
Scottish Claymore. I think it trumps all of the other categories here. It cuts through armor, cuts through people, looks awesome, kills cavalry....
Everything but stabbing (though it's capable)
Katana you mean? There are plenty that have been run through w/ one, but not exactly a great abundance of steel armor in feudal Japan, so I digress. I guess if you're good enough, or, conversely, the other guy is slowed down sufficiently in heavier gear/armor, you can put the business end where you need it, but ideally, 2 guys in silk clothes & gaki, it fits the bill there.
Scottish Claymore. I think it trumps all of the other categories here. It cuts through armor, cuts through people, looks awesome, kills cavalry....
Properly trained is one thing, if you're big/strong enough to hoist it, let alone use it effectivly, that's another. It's such a beast (huge). Surely, it will ruin someone's day, but it's contingent on a big if IMO.
ie) No more speed factors for one. Unwieldy and makes you tire easilly. But, oh, what a cost. If you're fast/lucky enough to land a claymore blow, yeah, it's likely over in no uncertain terms. It's just, how big a gambling man are you?
In the time it might take to ready an overhead chop, a more deft advesary may close that gap and put a smaller blade, dagger even, in your gut. It's like w/ firearms; do you want a bigger capacity, accuracy, power, etc? Always a trade off. Right tool for the right job.
Then the staying power of a weapon to user dynamic. Live/death combat is the workout of a lifetime to be blunt. He who tires first is likely more disadvantaged in the permanent sense. So, guys like me tend to go for the lighter fare given our builds
(that's a nice way of saying thin or "aerodynamic" ;)).Cav? I definetly would want a different weapon, likely, not a sword. Though it's terrific reach is nice...just not as nice as a pike staff or like polearm designed for cav. Again, right tool, right job. Mounted enemy is likely using a faster weapon (1-handing likely given reigns). Plus, well, the mount itself is fast. I shudder at the prospect of a slower weapon in contention. I imagine readying it like a polearm vs. the horse instead of the rider to impale is best bet, but you dare not miss, you know?
Yeah, I'd rather be wearing plate armor, be nigh invulnerable and then kill you with the claymore :P
Out of all the swords though it's the best suited for Cav. It can easily take the head off the horse. but then, that's not all that surprising.
Yeah, I'd rather be wearing plate armor, be nigh invulnerable and then kill you with the claymore :P
Actually, I think there are swords even bigger even better suited to kill cavalry. Like this:
EDIT: And yeah, most asian weapons suck against armor that isn't leather or lightly plated iron/steel.
There's a reason they put the pikemen in the front ranks, not heavy infantry for these purposes. Big weapon (sword) = big committment.
Cpt_Micha: Yeah but like all Asian weapons it sucks against real armor.
I wouldn't want to test my odds vs. a daikyo , even in plate. We know what the Welsh longbowmen did to heavilly armored French knights. Naginata can punch through some armor, just a pole-arm really, and tetsubo will crush regardless. That no-dachi (nice post & pic btw) is formidable in no uncertain terms too. Reach of a greatsword, nastier edge...it's just, once agian, the armor equation. So, barding/no barding? I suppose it wouldn't be terribly difficult to punch through medium fare, though plate is likely too much.
Not a lot of metal to go around.
It's just, yeah, "Asian"?, most immediately envision katanas and it's downhill from there. I'm sure if it were a smaller planet and they were squaring off against huns or Saracans, they would've adapted to suit that enemy. Way of all things.
Kukiri required a lot of skill to use effectivley.
It's more a tool than a weapon. It's really good for pruning
It can be used for stabby stab stab, but most of it's uses as both a tool and weapon usually involve some kind of slash or cutting motion. They work wonders in a garden.
Nuh uh.
Yuh-huh.
Yuh-huh.
No way, dood. Like totally no way.
Smart money is on the very fast moving object(s) w/ the very long piercing implement (lance) vs. the slower, ground-based antagonist w/ the shorter weapon. And even then, should the lance miss you, getting crushed under a nasty trample isn't a very attractive alternative either.
There's a reason they put the pikemen in the front ranks, not heavy infantry for these purposes. Big weapon (sword) = big committment.
I wouldn't want to test my odds vs. a daikyo , even in plate. We know what the Welsh longbowmen did to heavilly armored French knights. Naginata can punch through some armor, just a pole-arm really, and tetsubo will crush regardless. That no-dachi (nice post & pic btw) is formidable in no uncertain terms too. Reach of a greatsword, nastier edge...it's just, once agian, the armor equation. So, barding/no barding? I suppose it wouldn't be terribly difficult to punch through medium fare, though plate is likely too much.
Not a lot of metal to go around.
It's just, yeah, "Asian"?, most immediately envision katanas and it's downhill from there. I'm sure if it were a smaller planet and they were squaring off against huns or Saracans, they would've adapted to suit that enemy. Way of all things.
Depends heavily on the century of plate armor. Also if we are talking about Agincourt there were several other factors which got the English the win, none of which had much to do with the AP of the Longbow. It was all terrain and deployment. You know the sayin location location location.
Plate armor during it's highest point, laughs off guns, which means arrows too. Chain armor is enough to stop the sharp slashing weapons of the curved variety. It's just the way the blade is shaped.
Plate also does really well v Bludgeoning weapons due to how it distributes force of impact (especially of the slashing and blunt force trauma kind) most of the force is actually deadened/deflected before it gets even down to the arming jack.
European weapons are designed to be stupidly lethal to have any level of effectiveness against heavy armor because of this. (it's why the mace and etc have the sharp pointy bits,) the giant club (the tetsubo IIRC) is made to concentrate force onto a small area as well with the little round points, but little round points aren't enough to do anything to another curved strong, reinforced metal surface. That's why the Western world used Sharp Metal Points on their club type weapons.
The Asian world in general packs similar weapons and share very similar weaknesses in design. They just weren't designed around having to deal with Plate Armor. Because they didn't have the easily harvestable resources that the West had during that time period (or after really) in the way of metal.
No way, dood. Like totally no way.
Like totally yes way. There is so another country in that area. I think it's called Russia. Yeah, Russia. so there.
Like totally yes way. There is so another country in that area. I think it's called Russia. Yeah, Russia. so there.
Yeah? Well, Russia ain't Asia, man. Japan is. Totally. An' I'll so prove it right friggin' now, too. Observe and be boggled:
J-A-P-A-N
A-S-I-A-N
Coincidence? I think not!
This is starting to turn into a classic katana thread :P
Except for once, thank God, it's not about katanas. Refreshing to nerdrage over Highland Claymores for once ;) .
EDIT: Sweet. Not only did I just hit 1,555 posts, I actually got to a daily average of 1,55. Being the numerology aficionado that I am, I think I should stop posting today...
R-U-S-S-I-A
K-A-T-A-N-A
Coincidence? I think not! Consider your minds blown.
More than my mind was blown, Z_B. More than my mind was blown.
Hmm. That's got nothing to do with me. I only blow minds, I'm afraid. Mayhap you'd best contact a physician? Or a constable ...
Hmm. That's got nothing to do with me. I only blow minds, I'm afraid. Mayhap you'd best contact a physician? Or a constable ...
That is an excellent suggestion, Danky Dankerson! I thank you!
That is an excellent suggestion, Danky Dankerson! I thank you!
Who be he? He be not me ...
Who be he? He be not me ...
Whatever, Danky. You know that you are Danky Dankerson VII.
Whatever, Danky. You know that you are Danky Dankerson VII.
*ahem*
Who be he? He be not me ...
*ahem*
Who be he? He be not me ...
Ah, I understand now, Danky. Fear not, your true identity shall remain a secret.
This is starting to turn into a classic katana thread :P
Except that Katanas are only good for cutting things like pizza. And bamboo polls. So unless this thread is about pizza and the slicing of pizza it ain't about Katanas. :P
Except that Katanas are only good for cutting things like pizza. And bamboo polls. So unless this thread is about pizza it ain't about Katanas. :P
Only if they're made of friggin' Uranium, man. Let's not get all crazy hyah.
Next up, Chainsaw.
For Slashing against lightly armored enemies, Katanas are nice.
For Brutal Efficiency in killing, however, the Roman Gladius is probably best. Short, with a tip designed for penetrating armor, a quick graceless stab mean a gut wound that takes a target off the field, takes three more off temporarily to pull him out, and still probably kills him even with medical attention.
In 4e terms, Broadsword is best. 1d10 Versitile heavy blade. Can't argue with that. No feat needed, as it's a martial weapon.
1) Lightsaber
2) Lightsaber
3) Lightsaber
4) Lightsaber
5) Lightsaber
6) Lightsaber
Obviously. Unless we're sticking to D&D weapons, in which case:
1) Mindblade
2) Mindblade
3) Mindblade
4) Mindblade
5) Mindblade
6) Mindblade
Here endeth the thread.
Anyways -for all intents and purposes, the Claymore is probably one of the best swords ever made. It can cut through men like butter, and could rack up as many (or more than) three kills in a single swing. All in all, it was a terribly destructive weapon that was simple to use, yet could cut a man cleanly and half - even through thick spinal columns.
Big crossguards, about 30 cm.
And more important, using the Spanish fight method "La Destreza Verdadera".
First of all, trying to judge a sword by it's ability to bypass armor is pointless. Blunt weapons, such as maces or hammers, were the typical answer to armor - while swords simply glance off of armor, blunt weapons can still break bones, cause concusions, etc.
Anyways -for all intents and purposes, the Claymore is probably one of the best swords ever made. It can cut through men like butter, and could rack up as many (or more than) three kills in a single swing. All in all, it was a terribly destructive weapon that was simple to use, yet could cut a man cleanly and half - even through thick spinal columns.
Not that simple to use took a lot of strength and the swings would go wild. Almost as hard to really aim as a large axe. Something light like a Saber, or rapier is what you want in sword something you can get into action quickly and use with a minimum amount of strength effectivley, and as I said nothing is as simple as a gladius.
A Claymore is only good if you can swing it in the first place. If combat gets too crowded then you wont be able to swing. Holding onto the weapon in such a situation is no good. Also, even though it can cut clean through a person, I'm sure it would have quite a bit of trouble against armored foes especially if they are using shields and have at least medium armor worn. The Claymore is mainly a weapon that was designed by warriors that would wear little to no armor to fight enemies that would wear little to no armor.
At least he's invisible now - like all the cool kids!
Not that simple to use took a lot of strength and the swings would go wild. Almost as hard to really aim as a large axe. Something light like a Saber, or rapier is what you want in sword something you can get into action quickly and use with a minimum amount of strength effectivley, and as I said nothing is as simple as a gladius.
That's basically my position. "If the shoe fits..."
I guess, to relate this in game, my Dex is definetly higher than my Str IRL (mostly bone & gristle
), and after a few years of fencing, well, guess which I favor? Lighter fare plz.Beyond that? Yeah, I'll take the gun thank you. Here, not sure if I have Weapon Finesse so to speak, or would even know what that'd translate to out here, but given my build and attributes, "right tool, right job". I'd easilly wear out w/ such a large, formidable weapon (claymore) quickly, then it'd be over. I guess I'm more of a speed and diversity guy over raw power one.
Still, there's some linebacker out there w/ a claymore just waiting to grind me to burger...or bite off more than he could chew depending. Who knows. Best weapon I have is my cell...
Anyway, for what it's worth, I have a katana (no frills and I haven't sliced through a tank recently ;)), my g/f, a full daisho, and even those, admittedly, lighter blades by a long shot, can, and do, wear you out. What little kendo I took, is an exhausting experience and painful as Hell, illustrates it good enough. Quite the workout, and these are a far cry from a claymore. Still, I'd prefer a different blade despite alleged proficiency w/ my katana. Were I a larger man (or a full Scot?), I might try one on. Sadly, the only Scots in my family were horse theives, hence the American "immigration".
I guess it lends itself to the "end the fight as fast as possible" schtick (nova?) lest you wear out? I could do that w/ a katana, though I'd still take a drusus or gladius for typical gaming fare. I still don't know which is deadliest (not qualified to know) per melee anyway. Out here, IRL, w/out armor, I'll use the quasi-legal mantle piece in my home though.
A Claymore is only good if you can swing it in the first place. If combat gets too crowded then you wont be able to swing. Holding onto the weapon in such a situation is no good. Also, even though it can cut clean through a person, I'm sure it would have quite a bit of trouble against armored foes especially if they are using shields and have at least medium armor worn. The Claymore is mainly a weapon that was designed by warriors that would wear little to no armor to fight enemies that would wear little to no armor.
Ever hear of the technique called halfswording? Its where you grip part of the blade and thrust with it, like a spear. Its very effective against armor and is the absolutely indispensable technique of any two-handed sword.
The lower section of the claymore's blade is left blunt and often wrapped specifically so you could easily halfsword it (This section is called a ricasso commonly, and is actually a very common feature of most swords, particularly of the two handed variety). Its VERY effective against heavy armored opponents because it provides for great control and puncturing power.
On the left is an example of halfswording in action. Right is another often forgotten technique of real swordsmanship thats also effective against an armored opponent: Using the sword as a hammer.
Ever hear of the technique called halfswording? Its where you grip part of the blade and thrust with it, like a spear. Its very effective against armor and is the absolutely indispensable technique of any two-handed sword.
Yes and even though it might be good in a duel, it's likely to get stuck in you're opponent so if done out in the battlefield then you better hope you have a backup weapon. That or hope your enemies give you a minute to pull it out the person you stabbed.
Yes and even though it might be good in a duel, it's likely to get stuck in you're opponent so if done out in the battlefield then you better hope you have a backup weapon. That or hope your enemies give you a minute to pull it out the person you stabbed.
No it won't, not any more than a spear would get stuck in an opponent. Probably even less so due to the longer triangular shape and cross section of the blade. Many treatises of war and swordsmanship all advocate the technique's use on the battlefield in addition to duels, and there are ample examples of artwork of battles depicting the technique in use, so its known to have been used on the field. Its also hailed as the most effective technique to use against someone in plate armor, not just for its puncturing power, but also for the greatly enhanced control you have over the blade making it easier to strike against the lighter-armored areas.
Anyway, alternate uses of blade 'x': versatility is something we haven't covered and we really should've. A 1-trick pony is often a death sentence. To that end, what would you all recommend, weaponwise, swords predominating, in a variety of climates, terrains, etc., and the big variable, an enemy you cannot account for in terms of speed, armor, & weaponry?
No it won't, not any more than a spear would get stuck in an opponent. Probably even less so due to the triangular shape and cross section of the blade.
Not to step on your toes, but it can easilly enough. Anything you can puncture or lacerate w/ can, depending on a host of variables, namely, anatomy of said victim, armor, proficiency of said weapon, gravity, etc. Uncommon, but even a respectable bayonet (WW I and earlier anyway) could stick in an obviously unarmored combatant, especially if they were to double over as one is want to given reflex of pain, etc. Cleaving into a thick bone, say, a femur or skull, but not breaking it in twain is enough for it to stick too.
Now, an armored one? Even a non-serrated pocket knife can, and often enough, will get trapped in tin of beans when camping for example. What of steel then and all the flanges and snags it fosters? ie) Anything is possible.
My concern against 2-handers, not claymores specifically, is practicality:
Show
-I'd stress a shield for one. They get the shaft mechanically speaking in game, but IRL, there's a reason they're so popuplar. That's a ton of surface area you have to negotiate. Plus, in formation, well, you know...
-Utility; I suck @ horseback, the benefits of an internal combustion engine
. Still, fighting mounted is a big advantage, assuming I can stay that way. To that end, I'll likely need 1 hand on the reigns, not 2 on a sword. I might need a free hand to drag an ally to safety, grab something (an enemy shield, hair, rope, etc), and so on. I can afford to ditch a shield, but not so much my primary weapon IMO.
Also, it's likey 1 arm will get wounded, thusly nullifying a 2-hander. I want something to fall back on immediately, not eat up the clock & my lifespan.
-Room, the big one. I can't really use my katana smartly/effectively in the upstairs hallway or stairs, let alone a claymore. What then of a dense forest, cave or rock house, jungle, etc? Hence, big fan of Underdark spacing rules (narrow, low, cramped spaces), very realistic. Same rule applies to bows at times.
A shield, I'm not flailing about w/, it's relatively stationary, depending. In fact, preferable in tighter fare to press the enemy. Smaller blade affords more manueverability then in that light. Ending in a grapple, I'm confident that I could bury a shortsword in an armor chink, visor, etc., but I don't think I could manage that w/ anything much larger really. Unsure.
-I'd stress a shield for one. They get the shaft mechanically speaking in game, but IRL, there's a reason they're so popuplar. That's a ton of surface area you have to negotiate. Plus, in formation, well, you know...
-Utility; I suck @ horseback, the benefits of an internal combustion engine
. Still, fighting mounted is a big advantage, assuming I can stay that way. To that end, I'll likely need 1 hand on the reigns, not 2 on a sword. I might need a free hand to drag an ally to safety, grab something (an enemy shield, hair, rope, etc), and so on. I can afford to ditch a shield, but not so much my primary weapon IMO. Also, it's likey 1 arm will get wounded, thusly nullifying a 2-hander. I want something to fall back on immediately, not eat up the clock & my lifespan.
-Room, the big one. I can't really use my katana smartly/effectively in the upstairs hallway or stairs, let alone a claymore. What then of a dense forest, cave or rock house, jungle, etc? Hence, big fan of Underdark spacing rules (narrow, low, cramped spaces), very realistic. Same rule applies to bows at times.
A shield, I'm not flailing about w/, it's relatively stationary, depending. In fact, preferable in tighter fare to press the enemy. Smaller blade affords more manueverability then in that light. Ending in a grapple, I'm confident that I could bury a shortsword in an armor chink, visor, etc., but I don't think I could manage that w/ anything much larger really. Unsure.
In perfect honesty, they were far more effective than swords.
Basically, the reason everyone used swords is because the Aristocracy thought swords were cool, so they made them an elitist weapon of choice, thus making them an object of desire. Maces, hammer, spears, and so on were for "Peasants", Noblemen used the Sword, because it was "Chivalrous" or "Honorable" or some such thing.
Might I humbly suggest the the best sword is the one in your hand?
The best sword is a computer mouse? Holy gods ...
(Bad joke, yeah. At least I didn't make a dick joke though, right? Oh wait, I just kinda did ... :P)
(You know, unless you need to put it down or something.... A weapon built into your gauntlet makes a locked gauntlet seem convienet when it comes time to open thoes double doors.)
Versatility? Pata!
I do like those. If you've ever done any weapons training, the one constant no matter the weapon in question - from tonfa to firearms - is that the goal is to make the weapon function as an extension of your body. The pata actually takes this philosophy to heart with its very construction. Good stuff.
Not that simple to use took a lot of strength and the swings would go wild. Almost as hard to really aim as a large axe. Something light like a Saber, or rapier is what you want in sword something you can get into action quickly and use with a minimum amount of strength effectivley, and as I said nothing is as simple as a gladius.
Simplicity is a very important trait in a weapon, but rapiers and gladiuses could require two, three...maybe more strikes to get a kill. A claymore does require more physical strength than other swords, but it's destructive power is really top tier. In addition, it has a huge threat range...maybe 1.5x to 2x the range of the shorter sword (depending on who's wielding the shorter sword). That puts the enemy at a serious disadvantage.
As nj posted, any long weapon can be made shorter, and thus more precise, by repositioning your hands. It's even common to see "half-swording" applied to baseball bats, when used as weapons.
Ultimately, comparing short swords to long swords is like apples to oranges, because they serve different purposes. In my opinion, the only way to do it is to look at the destructive power gained compared to the simplicity and versatility lost...and claymores fair well in both areas.
For your reckless fusion of two guns and a katar, you get
.Did someone say something about firearms?
Best. Sword. Ever!
In perfect honesty, they were far more effective than swords.
For bludgeoning w/ ample room, yes. A sound answer to significant armor or a thick skull. However, no one ever cut the bridle of a horse w/ a mace, lunged effectively to buy space/time (you swing, not thrust), etc. Battering down a door though, very nice. Won't stick in an enemy either. All relative.
Basically, the reason everyone used swords is because the Aristocracy thought swords were cool, so they made them an elitist weapon of choice, thus making them an object of desire. Maces, hammer, spears, and so on were for "Peasants", Noblemen used the Sword, because it was "Chivalrous" or "Honorable" or some such thing.
Not a lot of "aristocrats" during the time of Moses, you know?
Show
Same for the Hittites, 1st iron weapons. Aristocracy is a far more modern concept, no? Now I know, spears were the way of all things for a good long time, but once 2 massed formations clashed, sword and shield was the factory preset, and I can't say it was entirely contingent on noble birthing, especially when there wasn't really a lot of land ownership, econ, etc in ancient times.
Medieval & Rennaissance areas, sure, I'll totally buy that. No one was ever knighted w/ a morningstar (probably?). But, talking Hebrew infantry, Assyrian charioteers, Roman legionairies...swords FTW (IMO anyway :D).
Same for the Hittites, 1st iron weapons. Aristocracy is a far more modern concept, no? Now I know, spears were the way of all things for a good long time, but once 2 massed formations clashed, sword and shield was the factory preset, and I can't say it was entirely contingent on noble birthing, especially when there wasn't really a lot of land ownership, econ, etc in ancient times.
Medieval & Rennaissance areas, sure, I'll totally buy that. No one was ever knighted w/ a morningstar (probably?). But, talking Hebrew infantry, Assyrian charioteers, Roman legionairies...swords FTW (IMO anyway :D).
@ Cherubaddon: So, that's a katzbalger. Not too savvy w/ the proper naming
Sorry, I didn't mean to come across as a smartass, though I realize I probably did ;) . But yeah, the look is part of why I like it, the 8-shaped, broad guard in particularly. But the best thing about that blade is, in my opinion, its proportions: wide enough for an arming sword, not too long, great sidearm. And as an added bonus, it was the weapon of the Landsknechte, and we all know those were awesome
.If ya want a blade that can dish out a lot of damage in a wide area then I'd go with the Falx.
Yeah, a day or so back I skipped over to Wiki when Cherubaddon name dropped "falx" a few posts back. Never heard of one before. Totally decent weapon, very illuminating. I could see these in mass production easilly enough as the design is simple and the metal required is minimal.
I was surprised to learn that a decidedly slashing damaged based weapon w/ a no questions asked hook would fare so well against an armored tortoise. I would've ventured faster, piercing weapons to breach the small and rare gaps afforded by tower shields and typical armor as legionaire defense enmasse was kind of the whole pannache of the formation I thought. Wide(r) executed attacks open up a defense more than a thrust which require less energy and time to pull off. Furthermore, they're more accurate, but targets are a bit more limited in terms of enemy armor & viability I guess.
Still, square top tower shield is a nice straight edge to guide "it" home (neck); falx just rides the top until thunk? Interesting (scary) that this is how the advent of the gorget came to be as a result.
GAME WISE: I wish the would stat one out for a PHB, or, if not there, has one been done in a 3rd party book, Dragon mag supplement, etc?
It looks like a respectable weapon, particularly if you like to Trip. Illustration is 2-handed though. Any more info available or estimations into it mechanical capacities?
Cherubaddon: Sorry, I didn't mean to come across as a smartass, though I realize I probably did.
Uh, not at all. That was genuine interest, not sarcasm, I assure you. I really didn't know. Even w/ a couple years German under my belt, I was drawing a blank beyond, "Um, it's a sword?", so, if anything, consider it a thanks/respect. Learning more every day, every way. Besides, I wouldn't snub you over something like this (I can be petty , but not that petty). But yeah, the look is part of why I like it, the 8-shaped, broad guard in particularly. But the best thing about that blade is, in my opinion, its proportions: wide enough for an arming sword, not too long, great sidearm. And as an added bonus, it was the weapon of the Landsknechte, and we all know those were awesome.
A smart match for a wide x-section of engagements for sure. Guard especially. We always made a point of targeting hands when we could. Most of the ppl I know in kendo all had broken fingers @ some point too (this is especially bad if you're a Fine Arts major
). Outside of a bokun or foil (melee anyway), I wouldn't know where to begin though really.Sidearm? Given the below, I'd make it my primary if I couldn't find a more suitable match for my frame/Str (wakizawshi, gladius, etc). Ideally, I wouldn't even be in melee if I could help it.
I usually tend to go w/ the conservative measure and this fits the bill pretty nicely. Seems like every time I elect for a specific weapon for a specific engagement/etc., fate always says, "F-U!" and puts you in harm's way in a completely different venue. ex) Zombies expected? Everyone gears up slashing...then we discover only a few Z's in change, but a huge host of skeles (DR/bludgeoning). Cav? We'll get longspears (set vs. charge) and then get pushed into tight urban quarters where they're often useless, etc. etc...
Query: Landsknechte?
We always made a point of targeting hands when we could.
Standard practice in weapons training. After all, if you ruin their hands they can't exactly use them to hold that pointy thing they're tryin' to skewer ya with. :D Bo, nunchaku, etc - all attack hands. This has an added bonus of keeping your core and your dome further away from whatever it is they've got. Their hands are usually a nearer target so your more important bits are typically further away. Thing is, so are theirs. If they're going for your hands, too, well ... that's fighting, I guess.
IIRC, 'Katzbalger' = 'cat gutter'. I do hope our German friend corrects me if I am wrong. :D
Standard practice in weapons training. After all, if you ruin their hands they can't exactly use them to hold that pointy thing they're tryin' to skewer ya with. :D Bo, nunchaku, etc - all attack hands. This has an added bonus of keeping your core and your dome further away from whatever it is they've got. Their hands are usually a nearer target so your more important bits are typically further away. Thing is, so are theirs. If they're going for your hands, too, well ... that's fighting, I guess.
IIRC, 'Katzbalger' = 'cat gutter'. I do hope our German friend corrects me if I am wrong. :D
Which is why Patas and Katars are even more full of win.
Which is why Patas and Katars are even more full of win.
Very true.
Dude 1: Aw man, I dropped my sword again!
Dude 2: *Super-glues sword to gauntlet*
Due 1: Whoa!
1) Anti-Armour. Depends on what kind of armour. I would say a thrusting weapon on chain (heavy in 4e). I would say a Claymore for plate.
2) Anti-Infantry. Longsword can stab and slash. If you consider chain light then katana is not the choice. A katana was not able to cut through the chain in 'Deadliest Warriors'.
3) Best Side Arm. Short Sword, same as longsword reasons. The little katana can't stab...and was used as an honor weapon anyway.
4) Coolest looking. Loiten Viking sword, the true vikings were the greatest things ever. EVER!
5) Best Stabbing. Rapier. While a truly lame weapon used by French (ends terms as to not offend the offendable French) it is designed to stab and thats it.
6) Best Slashing. A great sword of any kind. Including the No Dachi (big katana thingy) the raw cleaving power is amazing in great swords.
@1_T_G: Landsknechte were a German mercenary unit that was formed in the Empire around the 15th century after the Swiss example. Where those relied on pikes to the point of exclusiveness, however, the Landsknechte combined them with greatswords (the actual Zweihänder). Furthermore, being Imperial troops, they often fought alongside the Spanish, so they had a lot more experience with combined-arms with blackpowder units. In other words, Swiss mercenaries with the badass meter turned up to 11 :D. Though they did get a (partially deserved) terrible reputation after the 30-years-war.
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
Off course the BFS's (big f***ing swords) score good in this department. though I don't quite know how they do in practice. Seems to me swinging them leaves you full of openings. What if you miss, or what if your opponent attacks you while you ready for the blow? Then again, heavy armor was only used from horseback. So I'dd go for polearms; they seem to have a destinct advantage against mounted combat (yari, naginata, nagamaki, greatswords - dependant of where you draw the line)
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
infantry usually wields polearms (ref to point 1), so from a range point of view, you're screwed.; they usually also travel in packs, so you'll need a weapon that gets freed easely.
probably tainted by my training in Kendo, but I'dd say katana's.
- Infantry are mostly pesant folk, and in Japanese history, katana's were a status symbol. fear can be a powerfull ally.
- at least we in Kendo, wielded as a lighter two handed weapon you learn how to deflect blows ('uchiotochi' for one), or create openings ('hari', 'harai', ...) which gives you the ability to approach the enemy, even though he has a reach weapon
- because of the slicing attacks (instead of chopping attacks), the risk of getting your weapon stuck in your opponent (while an other opponent approaches) is smaller.
3) Best Side Arm
what are the properties of a good side arm? I'dd say not to bulky, fast to draw, and easy to use.
Spetznaz throwing knife (if you that falls under sword ...)
4) Coolest Looking
clouds ... oh wait. real life.
this baby
a nine-rings two handed dao.5) Best Stabbing
rapier
6) Best Slashing
cruved + sharp. anything else depends on quality and fighting style
@Z_B: Almost ;). More like cat-brawler. Refers to the close-quarter, vicious hand-to-hand fighting it's made for (compare English catfight).
Hmm. Catfight means 'girl fight' so I'm guessing there's some translation issues here. :D I get what you're saying, though, and it makes sense. Good descriptive term - when taken in its original language.
We do mention nasty crushes of guys (grappling usually) as a "dogpile" etc. Not sure which of the 2 in the animal kingdom implies a nastier melee.
But, a dogfight, as we see(n) them, isn't 2 guys on the ground w/ steel on steel so much as 2 in the air duking it out over the skies of France usually.
@Z_B: Almost ;). More like cat-brawler. Refers to the close-quarter, vicious hand-to-hand fighting it's made for (compare English catfight).
@1_T_G: Landsknechte were a German mercenary unit that was formed in the Empire around the 15th century after the Swiss example. Where those relied on pikes to the point of exclusiveness, however, the Landsknechte combined them with greatswords (the actual Zweihänder). Furthermore, being Imperial troops, they often fought alongside the Spanish, so they had a lot more experience with combined-arms with blackpowder units. In other words, Swiss mercenaries with the badass meter turned up to 11 :D. Though they did get a (partially deserved) terrible reputation after the 30-years-war.
every mercenary company gained a terrible reputation during the 30 years war. Heck every military did for using mercenaries. Only king from that war to still have a decent reputation Gustav Adolphus of Sweden.
As for swords the great sword is limited in usefulness due to how hard it is to carry/draw.
every mercenary company gained a terrible reputation during the 30 years war. Heck every military did for using mercenaries. Only king from that war to still have a decent reputation Gustav Adolphus of Sweden.
My post never said otherwise. Difference being, the Landsknechte actually had a reputation to lose.
As for swords the great sword is limited in usefulness due to how hard it is to carry/draw.
... which is why it was only given to the Doppelsöldner, who were trained in its use, making it a flexible and devastating weapon (works like a polearm against cavalry, wonderful to fight pikemen, great defensively if you know how).
To supplement my last post, a nice picture of a Landsknecht (note the typical uniform with the wide-brimmed hat) with both a Zweihänder and a Katzbalger.
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
Not exactly. You don't try cut through the armor, but instead work around it. Armored combat with the longsword became a refined art in the fifteenth century. While any reasonably stiff longsword will do, the large dueling swords picture in Vadi's manual would perhaps be the height of specialization.
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
What type of troops are wielding this sword against infantry? A curved saber would likely be best for cavalry, while a targetier might want a straight sword suitable for both the cut and thrust. A well-armored warrior on foot, however, could prefer a nice two-handed weapon. It depends.
3) Best Side Arm
I'm torn between the versatility of a light longsword and the hand protection offered by a basket hilt.
4) Coolest Looking
I'm partial to Danish swords with wooden grips.
5) Best Stabbing
Hard to say. Against an unarmored target, a wider blade would produce worse wounds. But against mail you thinner point.
6) Best Slashing
As this is what most swords are designed for, countless ones spring to mind. I see little reasonable basis for ranking, though I'm inclined to give Japanese blades the nod because of the reaction they prompted from both European and Asian observers.
Discussions like this can be (and often are) incredibly entertaining. The "problem," though, with this particular discussion is that there have been so many different types of swords for different uses at different periods of time that it is often a disservice to try and pick a "best," even within specific categories. For example, the best anti-armor sword during the Roman era will more than likely be useless during a different era. I am not trying to terminate this discussion, just expressing an opinion.
Actually this sword discussion is a lot more civilized than most of the ones I've seen.
Shut up you dirt eating tard!
:P
The Katana is best in everything!!!! Becuase during World War II Japanese soldiers and sailors used them to not only cut tanks in half, but to also cut in half Battleships and Aircraft carriers! :D
That was only after they perfected the use of spent uranium in crafting Damascus style blades.
Duh. Lrn2studysoardsn00b. :PThat was only after they perfected the use of spent uranium in crafting Damascus style blades.
Wrong! If YOU had studied your history you would know that Damascus style blades were in fact created by Japanese swordmasters but were considered inferior quality. So, they shipped them off to to Damascus where Damascus sword makers PRETENDED to make them. :D The katana still wins! :D
Wrong! If YOU had studied your history you would know that Damascus style blades were in fact created by Japanese swordmasters but were considered inferior quality. So, they shipped them off to to Damascus where Damascus sword makers PRETENDED to make them. :D The katana still wins! :D
But everyone that knows anything knows that the katana is just a pale shadow of the truly greatest soard evah - the Uranium Katana. It's so katana it's not even a katana anymore. Cuz it's totally better an' junk. Katana's weep at the mere thought of the Uranium Katana - a soard so katana-y it simultaniously made katanas the bestest evah while also rendering them obsolete. It is the Katana of katanas and katanas that aren't Katanas suck now. Only n00bs use 'em. It's da truf! Look it up, foo! :P
But everyone that knows anything knows that the katana is just a pale shadow of the truly greatest soard evah - the Uranium Katana. It's so katana it's not even a katana anymore. Cuz it's totally better an' junk. Katana's weep at the mere thought of the Uranium Katana - a soard so katana-y it simultaniously made katanas the bestest evah while also rendering them obsolete. It is the Katana of katanas and katanas that aren't Katanas suck now. Only n00bs use 'em. It's da truf! Look it up, foo! :P
Wrong yet again. You have failed to take into consideration the fact that infinity is actually a modeus loop. That means that your Uranium Katana, which is so katana it is not even a katana anymore, has actually made a complete curcuit within an infinite loot. And that means that it is so not katana anymore that it is once again a katana.
Well the glaive is like a katana on a stick, which means you can cut two ships in half!
I disagree: a glaive is not a kanata on a stick.
a nagamakihowever ...
Wrong yet again. You have failed to take into consideration the fact that infinity is actually a modeus loop. That means that your Uranium Katana, which is so katana it is not even a katana anymore, has actually made a complete curcuit within an infinite loot. And that means that it is so not katana anymore that it is once again a katana.
No way, dood. Uranium Katanas cut right through modeus loops an' scare infinity into compliance.
No way, dood. Uranium Katanas cut right through modeus loops an' scare infinity into compliance.
I humbly yield to your superiority. You are truly a Master of Nonsensical Geek Inanity!
:D
....nagamaki....
Now I am craving some sushi....
I humbly yield to your superiority. You are truly a Master of Nonsensical Geek Inanity!
:D
Nah, I'd call this a team effort. Well done, sir. It was quite entertaining and just a bit this side of very fun. :D
Now I am craving some sushi....
You too? We've been supposed to go for some again for a while now. Good times. Green tea, warm sake and raw fish. Tough to beat, IMO.
The Asian world in general packs similar weapons and share very similar weaknesses in design. They just weren't designed around having to deal with Plate Armor. Because they didn't have the easily harvestable resources that the West had during that time period (or after really) in the way of metal.
You are mistaken on that count. Chinese blast furnace metallurgy and mass industrial iron ore production was online when Westerners were still smelting theirs from ore.
This is how the Chinese were able to field such precisely engineered plows and tilling screws (?) for cheap, allowing them to plant and harvest crops more efficiently. It also allowed them to arm their armies with parts-replaceable crossbows in the hundreds of thousands.
This is what shaped Asian warfare - not lack of ore, but the presence of hundreds of thousands of troops armed with crossbow weapons.
Cpt Micha:
You are mistaken on that count. Chinese blast furnace metallurgy and mass industrial iron ore production was online when Westerners were still smelting theirs from ore.
This is how the Chinese were able to field such precisely engineered plows and tilling screws (?) for cheap, allowing them to plant and harvest crops more efficiently. It also allowed them to arm their armies with parts-replaceable crossbows in the hundreds of thousands.
This is what shaped Asian warfare - not lack of ore, but the presence of hundreds of thousands of troops armed with crossbow weapons.
Not to mention Chrome used in crossbow tips, and the first truly repeating crossbow in human history.
We know what the Welsh longbowmen did to heavilly armored French knights.
Actually they didn't do all that much, at least as far as penetrating armor and killing knights is concerned.
At first the french cavalry charge failed not because of knights being killed by the arrows but rather by their lighter armored horses being hurt and panicking.
After that they tried to walk up to the english lines by foot and succeeded walking straight through the volley of arrows with hardly any casualties. Unfortunately the muddy ground, coupled with the heavy armors and the physical blows from the ricocheting arrows tired them out to much so that they weren't in the best shape for fighting once they reached the enemy lines.
I disagree: a glaive is not a kanata on a stick.
a nagamakihowever ...
That's what I'm talking about! Light, thin, agile, respectable reach, puncture & laceration. If it only had a bit more of a hilt (do hilts even exist on polearms?), it'd be a smart match, well, for guys like me.
If only you could use Weapon Finesse on a reach weapon...
Roxlimn: Chinese blast furnace metallurgy and mass industrial iron ore production was online when Westerners were still smelting theirs from ore.
Not so much during WW II though when the mouths to feed were moreso. They were using tech that couldn't grind out good steel necessary for firearms. Agriculture and melee weaponry, sure. But once the Japanese threw down the gauntlet, well, that was pretty much it.
I'd venture that previously, in time's past, yes, older culture (more time @ bat), more ppl to provide for, and more ppl to innovate from. Paper, gunpowder, pasta, etc...
This is how the Chinese were able to field such precisely engineered plows and tilling screws (?) for cheap, allowing them to plant and harvest crops more efficiently.
Again, lots of mouths to feed. Necessity is the mother of invention?
It also allowed them to arm their armies with parts-replaceable crossbows in the hundreds of thousands.
You're saying they had interchangeable parts before we did? Or was our grand innovation simply under the purview of firearms?
williamhm75: Not to mention Chrome used in crossbow tips, and the first truly repeating crossbow in human history.
1) What exactly is chrome, how is it made, implemented on projectile weapons, and why? I know why you chrome a barrel, etc., not a bolt though.
2) When did they start using cho ku nu? Just throw out whatever you know.
Mirtek: Actually they didn't do all that much, at least as far as penetrating armor and killing knights is concerned.
As far as I knew, longbows and x-bows especially, can, and often did punch through armor. Welsh longbowmen and Genonese x-bowmen were feared in this capacity greatly, particularly the later as they were considered nearly peerless in their expertise. It was changing warfare & upstetting the status quo.
RELATED:
-Golf was actually declared illegal as it was gaining so much popularity in Britain that it was competeing w/ the previous national past time, archery. Basically, they wanted ppl to stay sharp in that militia mindset in much the same way the Swiss push for EVERY household to have a fully automatic rifle in their house and train w/ it constantly. Friendly shoots and village competitions are highly encouraged, keeps them proficient/prepared.
-X-Bows were outlawed by one of the Popes in that they suddenly allowed even a poor simpleton (untrained peasant for example) to kill via point n' click on an armored combatant...an expensively trained and equipped one at that, not to mention possibly an armored, landed noble or gentry. This was promptly overturned w/ the convenient arrival of the Crusades though...
Th
You're saying they had interchangeable parts before we did? Or was our grand innovation simply under the purview of firearms?
They had interchangable parts first.
1) What exactly is chrome, how is it made, implemented on projectile weapons, and why? I know why you chrome a barrel, etc., not a bolt though.
2) When did they start using cho ku nu? Just throw out whatever you know.
Dont know when and they used chrome because it would not rust, and with their teqniques it was easier to produce chrome than steel. They coated bronze tips with chrome for rust and also for armour penetration.
As far as I knew, longbows and x-bows especially, can, and often did punch through armor. Welsh longbowmen and Genonese x-bowmen were feared in this capacity greatly, particularly the later as they were considered nearly peerless in their expertise. It was changing warfare & upstetting the status quo.
Venice had some of the best longbow men as well. Also only army to put archers in something like plate mail.
-X-Bows were outlawed by one of the Popes in that they suddenly allowed even a poor simpleton (untrained peasant for example) to kill via point n' click on an armored combatant...an expensively trained and equipped one at that, not to mention possibly an armored, landed noble or gentry. This was promptly overturned w/ the convenient arrival of the Crusades though...
Yeah catholic church during middle ages was corrupt venal and evil. Too bad the holy roman emperor that conquered rome didnt just put an end to the position of pope. But I digress
They had interchangable parts first.
Figures. A lot of firsts we presumed weren't. All I knew is we ramped up firearms production and had interchangeable parts on that 1st. I'd venture that's a bigger deal in that capacity (more moving parts), but it doesn't matter.
Dont know when and they used chrome because it would not rust, and with their teqniques it was easier to produce chrome than steel. They coated bronze tips with chrome for rust and also for armour penetration.
Okay, I thought it was somthing more. Knew it was a protective measure (elements), but thought you mentioned it as it improved killing potential or something. Was unsure. All I know about that is a ton of troops in Vietnam were SOL (M-16 A1's didn't have chrome barrels...and jungles aren't exactly dry and arid climates), constant problems.
Venice had some of the best longbow men as well. Also only army to put archers in something like plate mail.
Ranged units in plate? Huh. I wouldn't have ventured that given mobility issues, weight, etc. Strange. But, I guess is the shoe fits...
In game, I can see it as some are committed to firing (and Full Attacking) from a fixed position, but I thought the point was mobility in that you can move and redirect fire very fast w/out a lot of work and worry.
Yeah catholic church during middle ages was corrupt venal and evil. Too bad the holy roman emperor that conquered rome didnt just put an end to the position of pope. But I digress
Well, a good many aspects, but they had/have their finer moments too.
I think they just saw it as a threat to the powers-that-be. I mean, it was like the AK of the day, cheap, easy to use, prolific. Not a good recipe for maintaining power over a likely disenfranchised and angry serfs.
Figures. A lot of firsts we presumed weren't. All I knew is we ramped up firearms production and had interchangeable parts on that 1st. I'd venture that's a bigger deal in that capacity (more moving parts), but it doesn't matter.
though the chinese teqniques were lost afterwhile during one of the dynastic struggles.
Okay, I thought it was somthing more. Knew it was a protective measure (elements), but thought you mentioned it as it improved killing potential or something. Was unsure. All I know about that is a ton of troops in Vietnam were SOL (M-16 A1's didn't have chrome barrels...and jungles aren't exactly dry and arid climates), constant problems.
It did allow them to move supplies easier and not worry about the tips breaking.
Ranged units in plate? Huh. I wouldn't have ventured that given mobility issues, weight, etc. Strange. But, I guess is the shoe fits...
In game, I can see it as some are committed to firing (and Full Attacking) from a fixed position, but I thought the point was mobility in that you can move and redirect fire very fast w/out a lot of work and worry.
Thats what they mostly did venitians used them to defend trade outposts in various places or on decks of ships, and well middle age sailors couldnt swim anyway so going overboard was already a death setence.
Well, a good many aspects, but they had/have their finer moments too.
I think they just saw it as a threat to the powers-that-be. I mean, it was like the AK of the day, cheap, easy to use, prolific. Not a good recipe for maintaining power over a likely disenfranchised and angry serfs.
Crossbow was one of the only things that could kill armoured knights church didnt want peasants being able to kill nobles.
Fact.
Khopesh is the new katana.
Fact.
And Uranium Khopeshes are the new Khopesh.
Truf.
Ranged units in plate? Huh. I wouldn't have ventured that given mobility issues, weight, etc. Strange. But, I guess is the shoe fits...
In game, I can see it as some are committed to firing (and Full Attacking) from a fixed position, but I thought the point was mobility in that you can move and redirect fire very fast w/out a lot of work and worry.
It dosn't matter how lightly armored you are, thoes calvalry are probably gonna catch you sooner or later. Besides, itsa handy bonus aginst the less elite archers, you know?
It dosn't matter how lightly armored you are, thoes calvalry are probably gonna catch you sooner or later. Besides, itsa handy bonus aginst the less elite archers, you know?
Venice was always a sea power though they never really tried to fight pitched land battles due to not having much cavalry. Normally it was from prepared defensive position and the plate was just added protection from missle fire of enemy troops, or in case they had to fight in close and use their hammers, or pikes.
Incidentally venice had the longest history of longest surving republican form of government 1000 years give or take way longer than the greeks of athens or rome.
Been reading a book on Italian history recently pretty interesting stuff.
You too? We've been supposed to go for some again for a while now. Good times. Green tea, warm sake and raw fish. Tough to beat, IMO.
Now I am wondering what Naga tastes like. :D
In truth the best swords are those edged on each side, one handed or two, a straight two edged sword will always beat out other designs, even the kopesh or the katana. As someone who actually studies the art of swordsmanship in the modern day I can say with confidence that you give me any kind of straight sword, one handed or two and I can throw at least two shots that your katana wielding samurai could never block just because of the nature of the weapon and its curve. One shot will hamstring the samurai, the other will take off his head. The katana and other curved weapons, the kopesh especially, (as well as simular weapons like the kopis and the kora) are terrible against shields, particularly once you get into heavier steel shields in later periods. That all said blunt weapons, particularly the mace, were much better against plate armor particularly later period full and field plate than swords ever were. Not only can you still do great damage through the armor but a good dent in the right joint on full plate and you can greatly hinder your opponents ability to move in the armor, and if you can't move your weapon or shield to defend yourself you're as good as dead.
Really?? I always saw the single-edge with an empty off-hand as having two distinct advantages, those being:
1) You can rotate around someone's blow or use the weapon more like a shield itself by moving your hand to the backside of the weapon and changing it's fulcrum from the hilt to somewhere else. I practice mostly Kenjutsu and Iaijutsu, but have spent a bit of time trying out Fencing and European-style Broadsword techniques, and they just don't seem to have that versatility. Perhaps I just didn't learn enough (:blush
, but Kenjutsu has some very interesting techniques that allow you to quickly maneuver around an opponent while keeping your weapon at such an angle that you can still kill them if they can't keep up. By moving your off-hand about 3/4ths of the way down a Katana and putting pressure there, you can suddenly find yourself easily rotating on a very different kind of axis than such a long weapon would usually allow; at that point, getting around to the side or rear of an enemy is fairly easy.2) That extra hand can actually do something. A shield is very, very useful (certainly not my style or strength in any way, but nonetheless), but the wrist is the weakest part of any Blade Fighter, and being able to grab an enemy with your off-hand and pull him to your off-side whilst moving past his weapon's attack range can be a real boon in a sword fight.
Of course, in my personal experience, most sword fights are decided by who makes the first mistake. Once you've made that mistake, you are generally already dead, because it doesn't really take that much to dispatch a human being with a sword. :D
1) Anti-Armored (most swords suck at this)
Eye jab.
2) Anti-Infantry (lightly or unarmored)
Eye jab.
3) Best Side Arm
Eye jab.
4) Coolest Looking
Eye jab, obviously.
5) Best Stabbing
Do I need to say it?
6) Best Slashing
Who needs this when you can eye jab?
All you really need is a really thin blade and good accuracy, and good speed. Just poke people in the eyes. Hell no one has armor there...
A few problems with it, though:
1) It's predictable, and extending into that type of pin-point attack can and will get you killed.
2) Innate body subconscious reflex could ruin your technique many times before you could actually kill them.
3) Eye-patches made from Kevlar, man!
The Cruel Tutelage of Pei Mei.
1) It's predictable, and extending into that type of pin-point attack can and will get you killed.
Become faster
Feint. It can work.2) Innate body subconscious reflex could ruin your technique many times before you could actually kill them.
Kill? It's an eye jab man, it can't kill
3) Eye-patches made from Kevlar, man!
Snap! But hey...how will they see with eye patches?
Snap! But hey...how will they see with eye patches?
Crap! You can always hit the other eye!
Crap! You can always hit the other eye!
But in that case, wearing an eye patch is a disadvantage to you...if you get jabbed in one eye, you're half blind, but if your other eye is covered with an eye patch, you're completely blind.
The best thing to do is not to wear an eye patch tbh :P
That wasn't the thread...
Dude, where's my ca- MY CAR!!!
Dude, where's my ca- MY CAR!!!
Totally, totally not your car.
Edit: Unless, of course, it was that one from that one thread. You know, the 2010 Honda Bukake. Then yes, it was your car. Sorta. Well, not your car exploding but a certain type of explosion involving your car. Something like that. Maybe.
nah ee' di'in't!At least you didn't go into "fuel-injection" or "MPG"...
This is the sword you are writing about:
This is the sword I was writing about:
Both swords were called "Claymore" by the Scots. The two handed variety was used from the late middle ages through the 1600's while the Basket hilt type, was used from about 1680 onwards. The Basket-hilt Claymore was often used with a shield called a targe shown below.
Here is an image of both Claymore and targe on display:
And here are some images of Highland swordsmen armed as above.
That isn't a Claymore.
Claymore literally mean Great Sword, which is where WOTC got the term from. They stopped using 2 handed sword because that term came from Zweihande which was an attempt at an anti-rider sword anti-pike sword. It was in fact rubbish and never took off, so Great Sword, which is a good sword, is a better choice.
The basket hilted broadsword was called a claybeg
