Results 391 to 420 of 1524
-
2012-05-02, 07:17 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Germany
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
Still, it's stories. I highly offended someone some years back when I commented that some US military honor code is as worthless as the chivalric code or the bushido. Sure, all warrior societies have their shining examples that a large portion aspires to and that almost every member would at least claim to honor. You can't just say "screw the code, I do what I want" and expect to advance in rank or gain comrades you can trust.
And on the other hand, all the exemplary soldiers and the well meaning soldiers will all want to propagate an image of their group that gets them all respect and praise. What about all the deserters, colaborateurs, and rogues? They are just never mentioned because it makes the other soldiers look bad.
Sure, I assume in every army all through history, there were numbers of soldiers who lived to the standards that were held high, but the stories of a few good examples doesn't tell you anything about what everyone else did.
And yes, soldiers are more likely do get killed, but their stories are pretty much the same as those of hunters and athletes. You remember it differently than it happened, and once nobody is left who does actually remember, all everyone cares about is making the story sound good and making the people who tell them also look good.
Also, the formal Bushido was written in 1899, a quarter of a century after the samurai class was abolished, by an agricultural expert and aspiring politician. Of course it was all revisionist propaganda.We are not standing on the shoulders of giants, but on very tall tower of other dwarves.
Spriggan's Den Heroic Fantasy Roleplaying
-
2012-05-02, 07:19 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Location
- Ashton, MD
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
Dunno, I don't tend to use television shows as historical references since I don't watch TV. I do recall a youtube video somewhere showing some noob hitting things with a late period european style pointed sword and a katana. I have wielded both weapons for various reasons (disclaimer - I am a polearm/spear fan) and have witnessed actual real world results from their use and abuse (sadly). Nothing mounted though.
"The very existence of flame-throwers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done.” - George Carlin
-
2012-05-02, 07:56 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- Amsterdam
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
If there's one thing I've learned recently, it's that 1/4 of a second is a very long time during an engagement. As far as I know, the main use of the false edge is to make a very quick counter after (or during) a parry. You can also counter with the long (or true) edge, but that takes slightly more time, which gives the opponent that much more time to parry you. Twisting your sword or doing something else also likely takes a bit of time which your opponent will gladly use to parry you.
This is a good point. From what little I know about Japanese sword fighting (not much, but my sister and brother-in-law are quite good at it), they don't parry much and practically ignore binding. Their defense is: step out of the line of an attack, and counter. The European defense is: step out of line, parry, and counter.
It's quite possible that by ignoring parries and binds, they have no need for a second edge or a cross guard.
-
2012-05-02, 07:57 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
Most knight deaths in those battles were within very close range to the archer lines. Of course, inevitably if you fire enough arrows eventually something will break through, but that says more about the absolutely terrible positioning of the French knights.
As to the second bit, proof please. I mean could it happen, yeah, but nowhere near reliably. Hell weapons designed to bash or pierce through plate still find it hard to do.
-
2012-05-02, 08:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
It may not be the best source, but the Wikipedia article on Agincourt suggests that the battle was shaped more by thick mud than by arrows piercing armour. It also mentions that advancing French men at arms would lower their visors and face downward, since the various holes at the front of a helmet are the most vulnerable points in the armour, and that the cavalry were turned back more by inability to charge the archers due to stakes planted there, and their horses were shot where unarmoured.
I'm not denying that arrows could pierce armour, but it wouldn't happen often except when hitting the most vulnerable areas - instead, heavy infantry were killed more easily by trying to fight in melee after marching some distance through mud already churned up by horses, in heavy armour and with their heads held such that breathing was difficult and vision poor.
The sting of repeated arrow impacts would certainly have proven demoralising on top of that, but lethal arrow hits were not the greatest killer of the field (But of course, my understanding is not backed up by extensive research, and I haven't seen numbers on the portion killed by arrows).
-
2012-05-02, 08:50 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Location
- Ashton, MD
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
Gah, my beautiful text was obliterated. Truncated Version.
So what? Close range is still resulting in bodkin points wrecking people in plate, or rendering them less effective for your follow up anti armor stuff (poleaxes, polearms, lochabers, hammers, stillettos and so on). Even the war of the roses had similar effects in battles with less congested terrain. A good general is supposed to make the outcome unfair for the other side.
I don't have anything reliable handy right now for the katana vs plate argument, aside from personal and therefore hearsay-ish stuff. Sooo, I will say that a poleaxe does a fine job of wrecking plate, if you get a good shot in and it is easier than you may think (although helms are really hard to hit square because of all the complex curves. Been there, done that.
Of course, in a battle you have a maneuvering target who really doesn't want to get hit, and h has his buddies along and so forth."The very existence of flame-throwers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done.” - George Carlin
-
2012-05-02, 09:32 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
What if anything would a master of the rapier be able to parry and block? Could he (or she) deflect a longsword effectively? A katana? A claymore? A mace? A spiked chain?
'Cause in these games, Combat expertise plus rapiers and stuff can defect anything.
-
2012-05-02, 09:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Kanagawa, Japan
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
So penetrating armour is a matter of degree. Plate and mail protect to an extent, maybe 99%, I dunno. Sometimes the English long bowmen had a significant impact and in other battles they were overrun because armour protected sufficiently to get in amongst them and the other conditions (terrain, numbers, and such) did not conspire to make arrows decisive.
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one’s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.
– Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)
-
2012-05-02, 10:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Location
- Netherlands
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
If I'm not mistaken, Hara Kiri was a common practice in Japan because the Bushido had no code about how you should treat prisoners. Chivalry did, and this (combined with the fact that suicide is a big nono in Christianity) explains why knights weren't into stabbing themselves to death when things went awry.
Yes, Richard the Lionheart did "break" this code during the Third Crusade, but that was mostly related to the fact that Saladin was purposely stalling the ransom negotiations to rob Richard of his momentum (and the fact that Saladin had made a habbit out of executing Templars and Hospitallers). The fact that Richard was willing to enter ransom negotiations at all indicates that he took this code seriously.
-
2012-05-02, 10:16 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Location
- Ashton, MD
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
Ok, I would point out that I never argued about whether bows were a decisive arm. Only that plate was not arrow proof.
The original comment that caught my interest was that the hypothetical samurai vs knight would wind up with the samurai losing if he did not dismount the knight by slaying his horse. Also, knights were very skilled riders, they know how to dismount under a variety of conditions so that act is not a decisive one.
Regards,"The very existence of flame-throwers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done.” - George Carlin
-
2012-05-02, 10:18 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- Poland
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
It certainly does depend on what one means by parrying and blocking...
Because trying to just 'block' the path of something more 'momentous' would probably cause damage to rapier, wrist, or perhaps just fail to block the attack...
But that's generally true to fighting in general, just setting some hard 'block' like movies tend to show generally doesn't have much sense as far as economy of movement and effective defense goes.
Displacing, deflecting at most 'non violent' possible angle, intercepting blade/handle closer to enemy's hands...
Only that plate was not arrow proof.
Of course there's always bigger bow, and some worse/thinner armor, so some plate/mail was probably pretty damn arrow proof, while others not.Last edited by Spiryt; 2012-05-02 at 10:22 AM.
Avatar by KwarkpuddingThe subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing;
Rush in and die, dogs—I was a man before I was a king.
Whoever makes shoddy beer, shall be thrown into manure - town law from Gdańsk, XIth century.
-
2012-05-02, 10:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
Let me ask the more generic question then. Can fencing skill be used to effectively protect oneself with a rapier against the weapons I asked about? Can deliberate contact with the rapier blade (blocking/parrying/deflecting whatever) cause attacks that would otherwise hit you to miss? Or, as my common sense suggests, most of rapier-wielding defense against these weapons footwork and agility based?
-
2012-05-02, 10:43 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
I'm not saying that a samurai has no chance against a knight, and I wasn't saying that the only chance was unhorsing them, nor was a saying that plate is 100% arrow proof. The scenario I brought up was a one on one fight between two warriors that were A, unlikley to ever fight eachother, and B, if fighting eachother would probably be fighting as part of an army not one on one.
That being said. My points were:
A full suite of plate armor provides better protection than a full Suit of Samurai armor
A knight is more likely to carry a close combat weapon that is Ideally suited for fighting an armored opponent than a Samurai
Training would probably be a wash, both warriors would have trained since childhood with their respective weapons.
Arrows can be used to pierce armor but are not Ideally suited for the task, armor having been designed to stop things like arrows/swords etc.
Swords, especialy slashing swords, are not particuarly effective weapons for engaging a fully armored opponent
Shields are useful. Samurai do not carry shields while knights might.
My conclusion from this, and I admit that I am not an expert, is that if a knight were to fight a samurai, assuming equal skill, the knight has a roughly 60% chance of victory compared to the Samurai's roughly 40%
-
2012-05-02, 10:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
- Location
- Greensboro, NC
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
1) not sure about the armor thing. the Samurai armor was very good. I'm not saying that it would be better, but I think it might be close enough to nearly be a wash, especially against swords/arrows. The sharp angles in the armor tend to deflect blows.
2) Samurai carried more than just swords. A Yari could pierce, and a kanabo, jo, or hanbo could crush the armor of a knight.
3) see number two.
Your other points are good, but these three seemed off to me. Samurai used many more weapons than just the katana. It would be like a knight only ever training in the long sword. I can almost promise you that if a weapon was developed somewhere, a very similar one came up everywhere else. nearly culture needed a way to piece armor, attack at range and up close, unseat horsemen, etc. (I will admit that in places like mesoamerica, there weren't pole arms due to no horses, or armor piercing weapons due to no metal armor)Last edited by ForzaFiori; 2012-05-02 at 11:00 AM.
Avatar by Lycunadari
Go Tigers!
-
2012-05-02, 11:03 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- Poland
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
It can be used to deflect etc. as mentioned. Maybe someone will localize some period illustrations later.
Or, as my common sense suggests, most of rapier-wielding defense against these weapons footwork and agility based?
Ideal options with rapier against some bardiche or claymore would most probably be biding and displacing, while attacking in really the same motion. To take advantage of lesser maneuverability of something with axe motion mechanics.
A full suite of plate armor provides better protection than a full Suit of Samurai armor
Aside from the fact that both plate armor, and, especially, 'Samurai armor' is very broad term.
armor having been designed to stop things like arrows/swords etc.Avatar by KwarkpuddingThe subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing;
Rush in and die, dogs—I was a man before I was a king.
Whoever makes shoddy beer, shall be thrown into manure - town law from Gdańsk, XIth century.
-
2012-05-02, 11:04 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Location
- Ashton, MD
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
Debatable, but only up to the point where knights are wearing something like Milanese plate or some of the german armors. The transition harness is roughly equivalent and the samuai gear permits better movement.
There are warhammers and large axes but broadly speaking you are correct, a knight would have a sword and a pretty good dagger. Maybe a mace.
Yes.
Nah, this is a big arms race all the way through history. I would say that armor reduces the damage, or the chances of it happening. There was no perfect armor.
Katanas can slash, but they have a very nice, stiff construction and thrust just fine. There are plenty of thrusts used in kenjutsu.
Very true. Even your lancer type of mounted samurai did not carry shields.
As an aside, the Mongols did pretty well fighting the europeans depending on which histories you like, and they were slasher and archer types. Also my comment wasn't directed at you it was at Eulman1s12, but this it fun to talk about."The very existence of flame-throwers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done.” - George Carlin
-
2012-05-02, 11:34 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
I don't think anyone would say that samurai armor was bad, I personally think the overdesigned ones look a bit silly and I'm curious how odd feeling the more ornate helmets would be but that's something else. The one bit of evidence we have for how the armor really compares was that when European plate became available in Japan the wealthy immediately bought and used it.
-
2012-05-02, 11:57 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
A data point for you: Rapier Parrying Longsword.
Short version: with proper technique and skill, a rapier can indeed parry an attack with a longsword. Unfortunately no video.And in fleeing one passed too near me and I cut off his head to teach him some manners.
-Kosru Malik, The Road of Azrael, Robert E. Howard.
-
2012-05-02, 12:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Location
- Ashton, MD
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
To a point. The european smiths had ben able to craft bullet resistant breastplates which the japanese hadn't, since muskets were not in common usage. If you look at, umm, the movie Ran some of the nobles are wearing european breastplates and everything else is samurai style armor. Given time, and access to more metals the japanese were able to improve on certain imports. For instance, japanese muskets were arguably superior to the ones that the portuguese, dutch and so forth sold to them.
"The very existence of flame-throwers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done.” - George Carlin
-
2012-05-02, 01:28 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- Washington, D.C.
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
Back to a gun question. Why is a standing position also known as an "offhand" position?
I was watching Top Shot last night and was thoroughly confused when the shooters were standing and were shooting with their dominant hands. Only when I got to a computer did I realize that "offhand" meant the same as standing.
-
2012-05-02, 04:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
- Location
- The great state of denial
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
By the time plate armour was prevalent in Europe, Japanese armies began incorporating mass gun volleys (such as at Sekigahara and the Imjin war) and began reducing armour, instead relying on mass formations and counter volleys. (The formation used during the Imjin war looked practically like a gun line from the 1700s in Europe) The armour the Japanese used during the Genpei war in 1200, such as the O-yoroi armour were considerably heavier and probably closer to bullet resistant than the 1500s Japanese armour.
By contrast however, unlike European knights, Japanese samurai learned how to use matchlocks by the 1600s in mass formations and at the time, were using what was probably a superior firearm. (Old Japanese firearms from the era have iron sights and in some specific cases, thicker, larger barrels for larger charges of powder and thus superior penetration). They likely didn't bulletproof their armour for the same reason armour fell into disfavour by the 1700s, where the mass volley could defeat armour even where full plate could stop a few errant bullets here and there. Probably exacerbated by the sheer size of some of their armies (160,000 matchlocks were sent to Korea alone) and the lack of high quality easily formed iron, focusing on superior offense while stripping back on armour likely made sense at the time.Me: I'd get the paladin to help, but we might end up with a kid that believes in fairy tales.
DM: aye, and it's not like she's been saved by a mysterious little girl and a band of real live puppets from a bad man and worse step-sister to go live with the faries in the happy land.
Me: Yeah, a knight in shining armour might just bring her over the edge.
-
2012-05-02, 04:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
My etymology reference suggests that rather than just while standing, it also referred to firing without a rest or other support (whether or not this is still the case for shooting, unfortunately, is beyond my knowledge). The word itself refers to doing something freely or straightaway, usually without prep, as in an offhand comment or action.
-
2012-05-02, 04:23 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- Washington, D.C.
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
-
2012-05-02, 05:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- Vancouver
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
The Lords of Uncloaked Steel
"But iron - cold iron - is master of them all."
-
2012-05-02, 05:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- Amsterdam
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
If George Silver is to be believed, nothing. I don't know much about rapiers myself, but Silver claimed that rapiers sucked at defense. And rapier duels tended to be a contest of who could make the first attack (which is also why rapiers got longer and longer).
Many RPGs apparently think that since the rapier is considered a fencing weapon (by modern sport fencers; others call longsword fighting also fencing), it must have been good at defense, but that was really the smallsword.
-
2012-05-02, 06:00 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- NC
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
Regarding the Westerner vs samurai issue (which comes up in almost every version of this thread), one of the previous two versions linked to documented cases of duels between Western visitors and local samurai. As I remember, the samurai got the worst of it and the city ended by banning Westerners from carrying swords. Check previous threads for more detail.
-
I laugh at myself first, before anyone else can.
-- Paraphrased from Elsa Maxwell
-
The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you.
-- Paul Graham in Keep Your Identity Small
-
2012-05-02, 11:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
I think we're talking past each other. What I was saying is that you need some strength to use the center grip shields, but because of the options available* they become easier to use if you have it and as such better. That also appears to be your position.
Silver probably holds the strongest anti-rapier position out of all the notable weapon masters, and I'd take anything he says regarding them with a mountain of salt.
*Actually being able to move your shield downwards, forwards movement to screw with an opponent's weapon's mobility, so on and so forth.Last edited by Knaight; 2012-05-02 at 11:40 PM.
I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.
I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that. -- ChubbyRain
Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.
-
2012-05-03, 02:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Location
- Cippa's River Meadow
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
Generally yes, but there was a vogue of rich samurai importing or comissioning European style metal armour in the late Sengoku, called tameshi gusoku, literally 'bullet tested' armour, so called because they were sold with a dent in it as proof that it could stop a musket shot (ie they actually fired a musket at it).
Wikipedia has a picture of a chestplate with a clear mark where the round impacted: link.
By that point (late Edo period), the samurai as a warrior caste had ossified due to extended peace so the (generally British) sailors with much more practical experience tended to beat the hell out of them.
The fact that the westerners also didn't fight in the way the samurai expected (due to having only practiced against each other) didn't help.Last edited by Brother Oni; 2012-05-03 at 02:15 AM.
-
2012-05-03, 05:04 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
I don't know what any of this is based on. By the 1600's most European knights carried wheellock or flintlock pistols and carbines on their horses with them, and matchlock muskets were ubiquitous among the infantry. The Dutch had invented volley fire in the 1500's and it was widespread by the end of the 16th Century.
As for the scale of battles, during the 30 years war in the first half of the 1600's over a million combattants fought.
(Old Japanese firearms from the era have iron sights and in some specific cases, thicker, larger barrels for larger charges of powder and thus superior penetration). They likely didn't bulletproof their armour for the same reason armour fell into disfavour by the 1700s, where the mass volley could defeat armour even where full plate could stop a few errant bullets here and there. Probably exacerbated by the sheer size of some of their armies (160,000 matchlocks were sent to Korea alone) and the lack of high quality easily formed iron, focusing on superior offense while stripping back on armour likely made sense at the time.
G
-
2012-05-03, 05:14 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Gender
Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X
That can be remedied
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...v=6r7VWIQCHvM#!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKOrFns_ZT8
Also regarding another post:
By the time plate armour was prevalent in Europe, Japanese armies began incorporating mass gun volleys
GLast edited by Galloglaich; 2012-05-03 at 05:18 AM.