Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

broadsword or katana???

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Good post, Matt, tend to agree. Yeah, I was pissed off about the big lie too. You know, the bubble burst for me when I finally got around to holding some real antique swords, sabres and rapiers. The lightness, but strength of the real historical weapons is amazing.

    Can highly recommend it to anyone (if they get the chance)....


    Sorry the history channel lied to you. But hey, I was pissed off when I found I had been lied to about medieval arms and combat too! It's okay though. The truth is much, much cooler.

    Comment


      #47
      Hahaha....that cracked me up, what a blast from the past!

      Yeah, but a broadsword is 1d8 for damage and a katana is 1d10.

      Comment


        #48
        "
        actually, infantry constituted most of the army and archers were secondary. archery was used to force enemies into different strategic locations. a purely infantry army may survive but an army of only archers would be slaughtered while dealing probably no casualties
        Archery may have been a smaller unit, but as far casualties are considered. I remember reading a couple of reports on average reasons of death in Japanese old fights. More then half died from arrows and projectiles, only very few ever got to sword fighting range. (Sorry, I didn't keep the link)
        Most of the infantry you wrote about got the halberds, polearms, and even most sword wielders kept it only as secondary short range weapon.


        Katana's did break.

        In WW2 I wouldn't fear the katana, I would fear the bullet. Even if the odd high quality katana could cut through a rifle in idle situations. Most katanas in that war were mass production "low level" (as far as I have heard most people refer to them today). And when facing a person with the gun in his hand, it's never the idle cutting situation and don't forget that even a mere wood stick - Jo can block a Katana cut with proper technique, so with a rifle - the possibility of cutting through it is very unlikely.

        Amir

        Comment


          #49
          The person with the katana in my opinion. The broadsword is not a standard two-handed sword. I think it's understandable for a rapier or a sabre to be one-handed. But for a sword like this that is meant to slash or stab, a one handed concept is a joke! The wakizashi is a one-handed sword, but the katana is definitely a two handed sword. The person who only uses one hand would be at a big disacvantage. The handle of the broadsword may be just enough to hold with two hands, but to slash effectively and to block without it bouncing back at your face requires a longer handle for leverage! Just trying to put things in perspective. It's not just the blade that's better for the katana. That's not really a big deal. The handle is important too. I think the katana's handle does offer a better grip because it would soak your sweat. But most obviously, it's a 2 handed sword! I am going to be daring enough to say that this debate is a bad one.



          Edited by - ichigeki on September 15 2003 08:47:26

          Comment


            #50
            Amir, you are correct. Range was the most important factor in combat and spear was the king as far as meleee weapon were concerened. That is another reason why I said katana might have slight edge over broadsword.

            Comment


              #51
              I have no need to read your links Matt W, though they probably are good ones. I am not as interested about the size and weight of weapons as much as I am interested as who won what war or battle and what strategy or weapon won the day.

              The heavy danish axe to me is a heavy axe that indeed was heavy enough to kill armored men and won a few battles against unorganized massed groups of infantrymen. The weight is not a major factor to my interest of the weapon to me, yet I want to ask you, "you say that hardness makes the weapon stronger, if it has nothing to do with the amount of impurities taking away by forging methods, then what makes it harder?( given the weapons are all iron originated)

              "the only thing promised in life is death, everything else is achievement"

              Comment


                #52
                The person with the katana in my opinion. The broadsword is not a standard two-handed sword. I think it's understandable for a rapier or a sabre to be one-handed. But for a sword like this that is meant to slash or stab, a one handed concept is a joke!
                I think you are a joke matey. You telling us you can't swing a 2lb sword around?

                Comment


                  #53
                  yes, bamboo pegs were all that was needed to hold the katana together. it kept the hilt on the tang.

                  the katana had a core of softer iron, with the harder folded high carbon steel wrapped around it. this design was a compromise between brittleness/sharpness, and flexibility.

                  how many of you have really handled a traditionally constructed katana? the very cheapest ones made in america are $1000 plus. an average one or slightly below average one from japan is around $5000. you can talk a lot of smack about it breaking and such, but i've handled one and did test cutting with it and believe me, it's a sturdy weapon.

                  i haven't handled chinese weapons of the same quality. i've seen a jian of very high quality but i did not test cut with it or handle it extensively. my impression is that the japanese sword is longer but slower than the chinese.

                  Comment


                    #54
                    how many of you have really handled a traditionally constructed katana? the very cheapest ones made in america are $1000 plus. an average one or slightly below average one from japan is around $5000. you can talk a lot of smack about it breaking and such, but i've handled one and did test cutting with it and believe me, it's a sturdy weapon.
                    There are decent katana available for around US$300. They aren't fully traditional, but then unless you used shoddy ore, it couldn't be. There are modern katana that use modern tool steels such as L6 to achieve duribility unheard of centuries ago. Howard Clark is most famous for his L6 banite kat.
                    Having said all that, European designs that allowed for shock absorbtion _are_ more durable than equilivently constructed katana, simple as that. The very hard edge can be very sharp, but is brittle. The thick mune may curb breakage, but the soft body will bend easier than a European type XII for example.

                    Comment


                      #55
                      david, swinging and fighting with them, are entirely different. you WILL cling swords together unless you are untouchable. what position will you be in, if you are clinging swords together with one hand as if you're fencing? You will have less control and stability with one hand. A one handed sword is more likely to be deflected out of control, and thus require more recovery time, than the person with katana. having said that, try chopping down a tree with an axe with one hand. You will notice the difference in power, control, and accuracy. I think that in a real sword duel, unlike fencing or kendo as a sport, leverage is quite important. It's useless to be able to give your opponent a shallow cut or poke, if your body gets chopped in half or your head chopped off in exchange. wouldn't you say?



                      Edited by - ichigeki on September 16 2003 05:34:27

                      Edited by - ichigeki on September 16 2003 05:37:53

                      Comment


                        #56
                        I'd go iwth the katana, becuase I've tried trained in both. More with katana, I'll admit, so I'm better with it. The katana suits me more, so I guess it would be my choice. They tend to be better-forged and lighter, too.

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Ichigeki,

                          Well, unlike the movies, if your "cling"-ing swords around, your just working on screwing up the edge. Edge to edge parries are acts of despiration, not the average counter. Counter cutting and use of the flats were how you parried, strong, controled movements. The position you will be in if you "cling" swords is screwed, becuase you don't know what your doing and your going to get killed.

                          Someone trained in the use of a single handed grip on a sword can control it while parrying and countering quickly. Most of Europe used single grip swords for a long period of time. Two handed grips became popular once armor became strong enough to eleminate the need for a shield. Celtic warriors were taking the limbs off of armored Romans long before the samurai came along. Single handed blows are not weak, useless blows. They can be powerful, deadly strikes that end a fight very quickly.

                          In summation, you know just a hair less about swords and combat with them than I do astrophysics.

                          Comment


                            #58
                            ichigeki ,
                            the european rapier where used because they where the most effective in duels period it is only an inch or two to the heart or brain a shallow poke to the neck kills i dont think you know what you are talking about
                            many people thought like you in medieval europe before everyone accepted the rapier but the people who did not use them died very fast

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Ichigeki,

                              Well, unlike the movies, if your "cling"-ing swords around, your just working on screwing up the edge. Edge to edge parries are acts of despiration, not the average counter. Counter cutting and use of the flats were how you parried, strong, controled movements. The position you will be in if you "cling" swords is screwed, becuase you don't know what your doing and your going to get killed.

                              Someone trained in the use of a single handed grip on a sword can control it while parrying and countering quickly. Most of Europe used single grip swords for a long period of time. Two handed grips became popular once armor became strong enough to eleminate the need for a shield. Celtic warriors were taking the limbs off of armored Romans long before the samurai came along. Single handed blows are not weak, useless blows. They can be powerful, deadly strikes that end a fight very quickly.

                              In summation, you know just a hair less about swords and combat with them than I do astrophysics.

                              just one more way physics can make my head hurt
                              agreed!

                              Comment


                                #60
                                so, we are comparing a rapier to a katana now?

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X