The conclusion of the knight vs. samurai debate.

Vorpy · 2011-09-01 01:29:27

The Fransisca was pretty not heavy, but built well enough to not need weight to defend against weapons or break through armor.

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 01:33:52

What I'm talking about is complete reversal, with both hands on the blade. This way, you're striking with the pommel or crossguard (or both, if you angle it correctly). So the crossguard can still protect you. Longswords were also designed and constructed with this kind of usage in mind; they look like swords, but they also contain the functionality of short spears, warhammers, maces and short staves.

Keep in mind that Liechtenauer's martial art is all about making strikes which defend you at the same time as striking, though. A weapon as complex as the longsword is nearly useless without a martial art to back it up.

I don't know if it'll be on again, but last night I saw a decent documentary about Talhoffer's fightbook on the History channel. Or perhaps it was Nat Geo? It doesn't spend a lot of time on the longsword, but it does give a demonstration of how this kind of combat was done.

Axes are okay. I dislike their lack of versatility, though.

Nova · 2011-09-01 01:47:16

I don't know if it'll be on again, but last night I saw a decent documentary about Talhoffer's fightbook on the History channel. Or perhaps it was Nat Geo? It doesn't spend a lot of time on the longsword, but it does give a demonstration of how this kind of combat was done.

I have been banned from the TV for a year ;-;

I don't know. I just keep being thrown off by the weight distribution being essentially the opposite of how I'm used to it being.

Counterclock · 2011-09-01 01:49:13

You've been banned from TvTropes? O_o

Nova · 2011-09-01 01:51:14

I do not know how you could extrapolate being banned from TVtropes from "I have been banned from the TV for a year".

As far as I am aware, the TV is not TVTropes.

Counterclock · 2011-09-01 01:51:58

>_>, My reading failure, It's late XD

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 01:52:42

^^^^ how does that even

Also, for the sake of validating all the above, I train with the Glenn Lachlan College of Arms.

Scrye2 · 2011-09-01 01:54:02

@MadassAlex: I've been looking for that episode for hours. I know exactly the one you're talking about. The one where they show how the knights were actually a shitload more aggressive and brutal than any movie would have you believe, and they'd do shit like grabbing their swords by the blade and quickly use them as clubs or the like, correct? That episode was badass.

Also:

Axes are quite difficult to wield properly in combat, being really heavy.

Yeah, and you think the Kanabo is light and easy to use in battle? The Axe is way more convenient, lighter, and deadlier than a Kanabo and if used correctly, doesn't open its user up to a vulnerable position nearly as much as the Kanabo.

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 01:55:51

It was called "Medieval Fightbook", and I think it was a one-off. I hope it wasn't, because they only looked at Talhoffer. Talhoffer's awesome, but they should get some love for Doebringer in there. And Ringeck. And even Fiore, as much as I love to snipe at the Italian masters.

Nova · 2011-09-01 01:59:25

I had been doing sword-fighting lessons with students (that is, acadaemia students) at the CSU in Canberra. Nothing with an official title, though, so I guess that does not really validate anything ._.

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 02:01:17

Well, it depends. If you were using the combat manuals of the swordsmasters as the basis, then you should at least have strong perspective.

If not, www.wiktenauer.com.

Nova · 2011-09-01 02:02:29

Yeah, and you think the Kanabo is light and easy to use in battle? The Axe is way more convenient, lighter, and deadlier than a Kanabo and if used correctly, doesn't open its user up to a vulnerable position nearly as much as the Kanabo.

I kind of did, but when I posted that I had run off of bad information (the site I had used had listed the average weight of a Kanabo as 4lbs, but the axes as usually around 3kg. The second is very incorrect.)

Like I said though, I am not an expert and would not have any idea how either performs in combat. I can run off of what I look up and the longsword fighting classes I took quite a while ago, and that is about it.

^ I cannot even really recall. It did work off the... lick-dude's guard styles, and had the five positions- Plow, Ox, Roof, Fool and Near Ward.

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 02:33:19

Oh yeah, so you were on the right track.

Near ward seems to borrow from later stuff, though. Can you describe it? There's a few different guards out there that could be considered "near ward".

Nova · 2011-09-01 03:08:48

It was achieved by rotating the sword down and to the side from above. We primarily used it to achieve upward cuts.

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 03:43:04

But closer to vertical than horizontal? If so, I think I know what you're on about. Kind of like a low-point, hanging Ochs, right?

Nova · 2011-09-01 03:47:54

Yes, closer to vertical.

I think it's closer to a low-hanging Vom Tag/Roof being held over your right shoulder.

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 03:52:26

Yeah, that's closer to a transitional guard used for countering rather than a starting or ending position.

It's more well-discussed in the backsword manuals, where it's more primary.

Nova · 2011-09-01 03:59:51

Yeah, it works better for delivering a strong upwards cut and ending in an Ox position than guarding.

But I had it drilled into me, so... -shrug-

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 04:13:55

Well, a guard isn't a block or parry, just a position from which to launch techniques. Ideally, your parry is a strike anyway.

Nova · 2011-09-01 04:17:48

Isn't it meant to be an advantageous position, though?

Dynamod · 2011-09-01 04:30:46

Samurai are more adaptative than knights are. knights are naturally superior choice in a one-on-one duel, but I personally think that in a live combat scenario, samurai would have an upper edge

my biggest reasoning for this is that samurai are able to switch between using long range weapons and close range weapons due to their armor being more flexible and helmets less vision restrictive. knights can use crossbows to a degree, but their main method of attack is to close in on horseback. a proper arrows flies with enough velocity to penetrate armor (just look at their history) even though later armorors designed their armor to naturally deflect arrows from their shape, it can only do so much, and better armor is rediculously expensive.

That knight in the video had the advantage of suprise on his hand. I think in a real battlefield setting samurai's are more adaptative and would be able to take advantage of a knights weakness initially would give them an edge.

of course, when a knight is in close combat with you, you're in some deep shit... katanas and such aren't really as great as the internet would make you believe... especially in fully armor clad opponents.

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 04:35:15

^^ Sort of, but they're mainly designed to facilitate techniques.

Nova · 2011-09-01 04:44:20

Samurai are more adaptative than knights are. knights are naturally superior choice in a one-on-one duel, but I personally think that in a live combat scenario, samurai would have an upper edge

Not exactly. Beyond the issue of armour deflecting arrows, you still have to recognize that plate armour is, essentially, a sheet of solid steel. Arrows usually couldn't penetrate through the steel from over about a hundred metres, especially when you consider that arrows arch as they fly, thus increasing the chance they'll be deflected. And even when they do penetrate, it's typically not deep enough to cause an immediately fatal wound.

Dynamod · 2011-09-01 05:01:33

this is just coming from what ive seen explained to me on the discovery channel, but from what I know high quality knight armor is like... really expensive. a career knight would spend half their lives just saving up for a pair. maintenance is another problem too.

knight armor is shaped to deflect penetration, and thick enough for most cutting and bludgeon weapons to be innefective. but every system has it's flaw, and the knights is that their armor isn't suited for battles of attiration. it only takes one arrow to incapacitate. maybe not kill, thanks to the armor, but an arrow inside you is a serious enough issue that if you don't get medical attention for it, it's going to be lethal. not to mention the pain of it moving around, being stuck in the armor and you at the same time.

of course I'm talking out of my ass here, im not trying to prove anyone wrong or whatnot, just giving my 2 cents. I can't back up anything I'm saying right now.

on an unrelated note, why is it giving two cents, when it's a penny for your thoughts?

Nova · 2011-09-01 05:11:41

this is just coming from what ive seen explained to me on the discovery channel, but from what I know high quality knight armor is like... really expensive. a career knight would spend half their lives just saving up for a pair. maintenance is another problem too.

I cannot really comment there.

it only takes one arrow to incapacitate. maybe not kill, thanks to the armor, but an arrow inside you is a serious enough issue that if you don't get medical attention for it, it's going to be lethal.

If someone's shooting at you with a bow, at that point, it's going to be pretty much more lethal to try and run or to stand around and try to get the arrow out.

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 07:05:21

Arrows are gonna bounce.

Nova · 2011-09-01 07:32:21

Not necessarily.

MadassAlex · 2011-09-01 07:44:37

You'll need a direct strike at fairly close range for a longbow. This isn't how they were employed, though. If knights were that close to your archers, something's gone wrong.

Longbows were essentially massed artillery and may not even have line-of-sight to your adversaries.

And then plate armour became more advanced.

Nova · 2011-09-01 08:11:04

You'll need a direct strike at fairly close range for a longbow. This isn't how they were employed, though. If knights were that close to your archers, something's gone wrong.

As I noted earlier, many longbows had the power to pierce low-grade plate armour at distances of about one hundred metres. That is, with proper equipment, which most people wouldn't have, I guess.

Still, at one hundred metres that's far too close for comfort.

You also need to factor in the blunt trauma an arrow can inflict.

Chagen · 2011-09-01 08:23:38

ThreadHop

Knights beat Samurai, NO EXCEPTIONS

European Power for the win.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

The conclusion of the knight vs. samurai debate.

Comments