Martial Arts skill. Sword vs hand?

[Blxz]

Swords as clubs is a theory that has been around since Victorian times, as well as many negative ideas about armour. Where do you account these findings to? Most of what I know is from my friend who is a History Professor. No matter how heavy you make a sword, it will never be more effective for applying blunt force than a mace or club. With light armour, there isn't a need for swords to be good blunt-force implements.

Really? Interesting that a similar theory has been around so long. I was reading some archaeological stuff about digs and information about Gallic oppida in France. I don't have the sources to hand as I didn't think to write them down (a weak argument that I hope you can forgive) but this is what they said. Fairly reputable sources as well, to my knowledge. I could have, of course, interpreted the facts incorrectly but in this case I don't think I did.

It isn't necessarily 'better' than a club at applying force, it was however thought to be useful in a similar way. Much like the plank in Kenshi, it was both a cutting and impact weapon. It was not wielded like a club and the theory didn't state exactly how it was wielded in frame by frame action shots but there were a few different ideas. The one I found most interesting was a warrior in a small space away from other allied warriors could use it in a circular sort of motion to build up momentum in order to smash shields, split helms, etc. Other potential uses were the heavy, two handed downward cleave and other more traditional two-handed sword wielding techniques.

As for iron, I am not a master Japanese blacksmith so I must defer to both you and Mattk50 in this case unless I ever find a source. Maybe I was mistaken? But I will say that Japanese modern iron industry is not the thing to compare, they do not mine their own iron but import it, much of it from Australia in the form of ore. Their iron sands are rubbish as a source with low concentrations and requiring much work in order to purify. Although I can only assume you guys must be right about studies as to the end result. I must have bought in on the myth like a noob.

[KuroHyou]

Low quality iron sand leads to low quality iron that needs to be folded many many times to get any real strength. Hence the characteristic look of the katana.

eh, im fairly sure the characteristic look is due to the use of different alloys for the blade and back of the sword, causing the sword to curve back naturally when it's cooled.

I'm not sure about the physical compositions of japanese iron sand, but traditional Japanese sword smiths and smelters have very rigorous standards with their sword production material Tamahagane(Japanese steel) , which only uses Iron sand. Smiths will return or refuse the shipment if it is not up to standard. Smelters also will not ship unless it is of passable quality.

That being said which characteristic your talking about? The hamon curvy wave thing design on the side of the blade, is produced from applying varying thickness of wet clay (different smiths will use different compositions of clay) prior to the quenching process.

The different alloys used isn't the main reason why the sword curves on it's back, as they're very similar. The curve forming is due to the hamon process as clay is a much better insulation than slight carbon differences in the steel.

[Mask]

Really? Interesting that a similar theory has been around so long. I was reading some archaeological stuff about digs and information about Gallic oppida in France. I don't have the sources to hand as I didn't think to write them down (a weak argument that I hope you can forgive) but this is what they said. Fairly reputable sources as well, to my knowledge. I could have, of course, interpreted the facts incorrectly but in this case I don't think I did.

It isn't necessarily 'better' than a club at applying force, it was however thought to be useful in a similar way. Much like the plank in Kenshi, it was both a cutting and impact weapon. It was not wielded like a club and the theory didn't state exactly how it was wielded in frame by frame action shots but there were a few different ideas. The one I found most interesting was a warrior in a small space away from other allied warriors could use it in a circular sort of motion to build up momentum in order to smash shields, split helms, etc. Other potential uses were the heavy, two handed downward cleave and other more traditional two-handed sword wielding techniques.

As for iron, I am not a master Japanese blacksmith so I must defer to both you and Mattk50 in this case unless I ever find a source. Maybe I was mistaken? But I will say that Japanese modern iron industry is not the thing to compare, they do not mine their own iron but import it, much of it from Australia in the form of ore. Their iron sands are rubbish as a source with low concentrations and requiring much work in order to purify. Although I can only assume you guys must be right about studies as to the end result. I must have bought in on the myth like a noob.

It goes with the general idea that medieval people were brutes who only use hard force. It's understandable that sources are hard to dig up. If you are able to find it in your research history (I'll try and find it myself too) I'd like to show it to my friend.
It's easy enough to misread facts if you're not an expert on the subject. Even after the amount of time I've spent learning about history, I need to ask for help regularly.

The Plank in Kenshi is rather like an unusual sword which was featured in Mount and Blade Warband. The name escapes me, however... It is also, of course, based off Guts' sword from Berserk, I'm quite sure. Not a good enough judge of its proportions to know how realistic it is.
As for the techniques mentioned... were the people commenting experienced with weapon re-enactment? Big swings leave you quite exposed, especially if you don't have a shield and are fighting as a group (you can use some shields while holding you sword two handed, of course). If it was a large sword, the largeness can be used for that function, to cleave shields and make them useless (shields have some interesting physics to them--they're not just a lump of wood), as well as giving you a bit of range to do it from. But large swords were by no means blunt. All swords were designed primarily for slicing--maybe that's where the confusion sets in:
Swords were never really sharpened to a razor's sharpness, you see. That would make them brittle and chip easily, and not last particularly long. Instead, they were sharpened to a certain level where they weren't delicate, but could more than one man in half with a single blow (I think I said the record was 7, one time--I think it might actually be 9).

There are lots of myths which unfortunately get spelled out as fact, so it's easy to get things wrong. I was lucky enough to make friends with a historian, so my source of information is thankfully accurate.
Regardless of the quality of the sands, the tools and weapons examined are all good quality iron. So either the sands are better than expected, or the refining process is good enough that it doesn't matter.

[Blxz]

Again, this isn't medieval, not by about 1000-1500 years at least. I am still talking early roman republic era, which in BC ~300-100.

The guy I got the information/quote from is an archaeologist specialising in La Tene period Celtic history. He, and I guess his team, made the assertation/observation that this is what the swords were used for. Also, I want to re-iterate so I am communicating more clearly. it did not look like a plank, I simply use this kenshi weapon as a point of reference to more easily explain the usage of the weapon.

So you can argue my inability to understand the material all you want but you will not convince me any differently on the matter until you dig up conclusive evidence that La Tene period historians are all wrong. I understand that a common sense approach to the issue may indicate that the weapons were not used in such a way; after all why go to the effort of making a sword to use when a simple club can achieve similar effects. But this is the assessment that I read and based on the sources they use and their previous expertise and involvement in the subject I will more readily agree with their interpretation than what random people on the interwebs have to say.

[Mask]

This was the reckoning about medieval swords--and they wouldn't have thought much different about any swords or armour of earlier periods.

Well of course it couldn't look like a plank. When I said that blade was obscure, I meant it. Making large swords was difficult in the early periods. As for the use of the weapon... it's just a big sword. It is designed to cut you in half while looking especially scary (the historical one which the plank reminds me of, that is).

is an archaeologist specialising in La Tene period Celtic history

you will not convince me [...] until [...] prove that La Tene period historians are all wrong

I think you got confused somewhere in the middle of that post. Was it one archaeologist who taught you this, or everyone who ever worked on the La Tene period?

but you will not convince me

Learnt a good policy from the friend I mentioned. If someone wants to learn, he's happy to teach them. If someone is uninterested in learning, he doesn't worry about it. No convincing involved, just conversation. Since he taught me, I might as well follow that policy. If you could bother to find that article which is so convincing, I'd like to see it.

But this is the assessment that I read and based on the sources they use and their previous expertise and involvement in the subject I will more readily agree with their interpretation than what random people on the interwebs have to say.

Honestly, if you use this for all cases, I'm happy. People too often fall for pit traps like iron quality of Japan, swords being razor sharp, or very blunt, and hand-fired guns resulting in armour being useless.



For everyone who has taken an interest in this discussion: Little summary for you.

Swords are expensive to make, and designed for slicing. As long as a sword is of similar size, they tend to perform about the same. It doesn't matter which country or period made the sword--it still cuts things the same way. The only way to use it for "smashing" shields, is for it to be a large weapon, since size and weight does mean more damage--but even so, they are not smashing weapons, they are still designed for cutting people in two (as many as 9 of them in one blow). The way to use a sword like a club, is the Mortschlag (Murder Stroke), also known as the Tunrschlag (Thunder Stroke) and Schlachenden Ort (Battering Point), where you literally hit them with the pommel or handguard while half-swording (gripping your sword by the blade): http://goo.gl/qQzuM
http://goo.gl/JHfSf

[Blxz]

Oh joy, we have reached the part where you start to break each part of the post apart in order to render it useless. I'll not continue the debate, you still appear to be referring to medieval era information. I will however offer a final bit of rebuttal in regards to you twisting my words about the people writing about this It was originally a single person supported by a team who made the theory about a certain type of weapon, this has since been supported by others. So take your pick about which sentence I wrote, either is correct.

And please refrain from indicating that I do not want to learn with that rather underhanded comment you wrote in regards to me not being convinced by your argument. It is unbecoming and low and is beginning to stray into a character attack rather than a simple debate of the facts.

I'll not be continuing anyway. I've reached the end of my rather limited expertise and unless I can dredge up that article or even other supporting journal works I think I will have no grounds other than this back and forth we have been going on with. Plus the whole topic is not particularly interesting for me, I simply got drawn in after making a few observations in regards to someone else's post.

Thanks, however, for the information about Japanese weapons. Wasn't aware that the Japanese were able to process the steel so well. I was always under the impression that it was poor quality steel that needed much work to bring into a usable state. I'll have some reading to do.

[1337]

Just a reminder that there really is no need to get too serious and heated over this kind of discussion. Debating works just fine without tearing each other apart.

Anyway, back and forth about a subject is alright up to some point and i think we pretty much reached that point here. As long as nobody links to sources and references (images, texts, videos,...), we won't really get any farther in this discussion. (and i don't mean wikipedia articles by sources)

I'd also like to get back to the original topic, being blade vs unarmed, since we pretty much covered the sword side of this issue for the last few posts, it would be interesting to get some input about the unarmed side.

For instance, I was always under the impression that fighting against a sword meant evading it and counterattacking in some way, just like you pretty much don't block in a katana vs katana duel (like shown here for example (it's a demo, but shows the principle well enough), this one looks interesting in its own way (because of the pushover guy, looks very katana skill 1 to me ).

Were gauntlets used that much? Doing a search about unarmed vs sword only brings up stuff about evading them . If evading is the way to go, then how tough a sword is would be mute at that point too i believe.

There was also the talk about grabbing a staff when fighting unarmed vs staff. Here's a video about a wushu competition, there are some guys doing fancy stuff with staffs starting at around 1:00, that seems awfully fast to go and grab it there's also a staff vs unarmed demo at 2:45, it seems rehearsed but it nice to watch anyway. From a kendo perspective, i see a lot of useless moves (dancing around) but it seems pretty hard to get near a staff user when he's that fast and agile.

PS: just a nice video i found while looking for real samurai techniques on youtube (but the vid isn't about that actually): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzhs1Z8Rwnk

[Mask]

Thank you for explaining what you meant by the first two quotes, Blxz.

For instance, I was always under the impression that fighting against a sword meant evading it and counterattacking in some way, just like you pretty much don't block in a katana vs katana duel (like shown here for example (it's a demo, but shows the principle well enough), this one looks interesting in its own way (because of the pushover guy, looks very katana skill 1 to me ).

Were gauntlets used that much? Doing a search about unarmed vs sword only brings up stuff about evading them . If evading is the way to go, then how tough a sword is would be mute at that point too i believe.

The demo is a rather poor example, since it is done for ceremony. There are some good principle there, though--like getting to your opponent's side where it is hard to swing. Generally, disarming involves staying out of range, then jumping in close just as your opponent leaves some kind of opening where you can get a hold of their weapon.

The Defence video also has a good principle. The method they show would require a rather incompetent opponent, using such a vertical, easy to dodge attack. Many downward cuts are diagonal, so as to make them more difficult to evade. Katana skill 1 does sound about right, for what he is demonstrating in that video.
For using this sort of move, it depends on how much animation is willing to be made for it. The easiest and most inclusive one to animate would be the player stepping in just before the cut is thrown, and grasping the handle of the sword--where failure results in the player not getting there in time and either having to dodge just in the nick of time, or get slashed.

I have heard a number of people say it really hurts to have a sword hit your hands, even with plate gauntlets, so that likely explained the unwillingness to showcase such techniques. I have heard that blade-grabbing is possible barehanded--but a people in accounts of duels have lost fingers attempting that, about as often as they succeeded.

[KuroHyou]

I have heard a number of people say it really hurts to have a sword hit your hands, even with plate gauntlets, so that likely explained the unwillingness to showcase such techniques. I have heard that blade-grabbing is possible barehanded--but a people in accounts of duels have lost fingers attempting that, about as often as they succeeded.

Beyond it hurting, apart from lightweight swords such as the katana, most swords will put severe dents into the gauntlet hampering the mobility of an armoured hand, and greatly reducing the combat-effectiveness of the person. I would assume those at 7kg or more would simply crush the hand before the gauntlet would receive a battered look compared to katana or similar class weight swords. Then there's those swords like the "plank" *shudders*.

For instance, I was always under the impression that fighting against a sword meant evading it and counterattacking in some way, just like you pretty much don't block in a katana vs katana duel (like shown here for example (it's a demo, but shows the principle well enough), this one looks interesting in its own way (because of the pushover guy, looks very katana skill 1 to me ).

your correct, in most cases evading is simply the better option. It requires less skill than to block or parry in an unarmed situation. Can you imagine how adept you would have to be in both sword and hand to hand techniques before you are able to redirect a person's swing before they swung? Reading openings and reacting to them is much harder when you simply don't have the same reach.

Apart from that, It's much less tiring to just dodge a sword swing than it is to say punch or kick the side of the blade away from you, even if you could hypothetically do it.

[Kamos]

There was also the talk about grabbing a staff when fighting unarmed vs staff. Here's a video about a wushu competition, there are some guys doing fancy stuff with staffs starting at around 1:00, that seems awfully fast to go and grab it there's also a staff vs unarmed demo at 2:45, it seems rehearsed but it nice to watch anyway. From a kendo perspective, i see a lot of useless moves (dancing around) but it seems pretty hard to get near a staff user when he's that fast and agile.

PS: just a nice video i found while looking for real samurai techniques on youtube (but the vid isn't about that actually): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzhs1Z8Rwnk

Hey I merely said I enjoyed grabbing spears . A much different dynamic than fighting a staff. Grabbing a spear after a thrust or locking in place using you legs or tucking it under your arm is a great way to put a spear user on the defensive and their movements are much slower and predictable given what's the deadly part of their weapon. Of course a lot of the time I had a shield of some sort when fighting them too.

Without a shield. Charge, bait the attack, sidestep, grab or better yet wrap my arm around it, charge with grip, attack, he has to ditch his weapon or break free which is hard provided I don't disarm him. He could counter shield bash but I can use that force to disarm him if I go back or down.
With a shield I eat less damage. Charge, bait the trust, bash it down, if they're going one handed I can disarm it there, two handed I have to keep them locked up/advance and never be in front of that spear head again. Not much good in formation battles though.

[1337]

Well i got quoted a lot there . I'll try to address most here but i won't quote to avoid lengthening my post to much.

I'd also like to start by talking about the weight of a sword. Just above, somebody talked about 7kg, that is wrong, most swords did not weight more than 2kg (4 pounds). Here's a link to ARMA (association for renaissance martial arts) with some accurate info on that, it comes with a lot of reliable sources too.

Now onto the fun part. First of all, i agree with Mask and KuroHyou (or do they agree with me? meh). Avoiding a sword instead of blocking it with gauntlets or whatever seems just the way most people would do it (except for those really courageous that run away). The videos i posted were (and i'll inline-quote myself here) a demo, but shows the principle well enough. I think Mask said just about the same thing after quoting me

Still i researched for gauntlets and just can't find anything about them being used to actively block swords and counterattack... seems to me like some people watch to many movies

I know from personal experience that getting hit on your hand will hurt even with shinai, a "hollow" bamboo sword meant for practice (you can get bruises from it and it weights only half a kilo), so i can't imagine what it must be like with bokken or other compact swords.

http://nintai.blogspot.be/2005/08/melbo ... minar.html

So I really can only see dodging as a viable tactic for unarmed vs blade. But this is a game and as Mask said, finding animations is crucial and Chris really isn't bound to make everything realistic to 100%.

Finally i wasn't really talking about your post Kamos, it was more of a reaction to the staff talk that came afterwards. Since i have never seen a real staff fight, i did look for them to see how fast it really is and it is damn fast lol.

PS: that video about the katana skill 1 was really more for fun eventhough it's meant for a demo so it's still valid. Here's one more at some point the instructor has the sword under his kohai's nose and he talks in a creepy way and then he kicks the poor guy lol

[Mask]

I'd say just as the blade is returned to the ready position, or just before the attack, for a disarming animation.

This is a forgone conclusion, but I'll mention again that the unarmed person is at a great disadvantage. The main time to use this would be A) Desperation. or B) Surprise.

[Scotterius]

You would have trouble telling Japan's iron from Europe's.

Really? Like native iron ore quality? That is really interesting. I would agree that the finished quality for the most part is the same. Still the medieval forging processes were very different on the two continents, as was sword design.

You have gone off against the sword as club thing before. There are existing examples that are still sharp, most were likely used so. I did not mean to allude that they are better clubs than actual clubs, my point has been they do have surprising abilities to defeat many armors even without visible penetration...because they are good kinetic weapons as well.

[Mask]

There are a number of forging techniques to get good quality metal. Swords can cause harm without cutting against certain armours--just that you need to aim at weak points of the body like the spine if you want it to matter much. You don't need good kinetic energy for trauma to certain areas to be effective.

Beyond that, I'm not sure we should get off-topic again.


If we do have the disarming move, I hope there will be a throw as I suggested in another thread. Grappling is the main way an unarmed guy can defeat an armed one, after all.

[iSuck345]

I cannot see if people are either just trying to make texts as long as mine, or if this is just an apocalypse...

[Scotterius]

If we do have the disarming move, I hope there will be a throw as I suggested in another thread. Grappling is the main way an unarmed guy can defeat an armed one, after all.

Sure, but disarming is pretty harsh. Retrieving weapons would be a real pain for the player. Checking your entire squad to make sure they have their precious weapons before continuing...yuck. I would think a more 'Dungeons and Dragons: Monk' approach would be better. Things like stuns, faster attacks, dodging and defense increase faster while unarmed, heck...maybe even mystical energy attacks could work too.

Once the unarmed route becomes a 'feasible alternative' to swords and 60 pound 'fragment axes', we have pretty much vaselined the shackles of reality. I think whatever Chris does it will be fun, I see unarmed as being spice in the soup.

[iSuck345]

If we do have the disarming move, I hope there will be a throw as I suggested in another thread. Grappling is the main way an unarmed guy can defeat an armed one, after all.

Sure, but disarming is pretty harsh. Retrieving weapons would be a real pain for the player. Checking your entire squad to make sure they have their precious weapons before continuing...yuck. I would think a more 'Dungeons and Dragons: Monk' approach would be better. Things like stuns, faster attacks, dodging and defense increase faster while unarmed, heck...maybe even mystical energy attacks could work too.

Once the unarmed route becomes a 'feasible alternative' to swords and 60 pound 'fragment axes', we have pretty much vaselined the shackles of reality. I think whatever Chris does it will be fun, I see unarmed as being spice in the soup.

I think that Chris said something about no magic.

[Mask]

I would think a more 'Dungeons and Dragons: Monk' approach would be better. Things like stuns, faster attacks, dodging and defense increase faster while unarmed, heck...maybe even mystical energy attacks could work too.

.......Please, no. Have mercy.

Have yet to see a game that did, "unarmed is as good as with weapons" in any meaningful or interesting way. I don't like the idea of adding unarmed combat and then having it nothing like unarmed combat.

As for the problem of losing your weapons... they need to sort out the inventory management anyway, since there are plans to have thirty guys under your control. Looting a dozen bandits and spreading the equipment between six guys is already painful--it'll only get worse with thirty guys and fifty bandits.

So, while sorting that out, they can just rig it that your guys will naturally equip stuff the way you want them to.

[Scotterius]

Have yet to see a game that did, "unarmed is as good as with weapons" in any meaningful or interesting way.

That is exactly Chris stated goal, sorry. Kenshi is fantasy, there are plenty of routes for him to take with monks. (And he is adding at least one monk order). Now, that doesn't mean we are going to have characters running around saying "HIROOOKEN" and firing blue globs at each other. That may be a wee bit far.

Hey, I think growing a crop in a few days is magical. A 60kg fragment axe, certainly is. I think the reason you have never seen 'unarmed is a good as with weapons' rendered in a satisfactory way is because it is realistically unfounded, and that is a fair point.

[Mask]

Where did he say this? I don't recall there being a lot of info on what was planned for unarmed.

Warrior monks (the kind you would see in a bleak setting where they need to survive) didn't favour unarmed combat. Some of them were the most feared warriors of their countries, too--using spears and swords like any other warrior culture.


They have a 60KG axe...? What is the max carrying weight of a Kenshi character?

Assassin's Creed 2 has done one of the best jobs I've seen. Because being unarmed made it easier to disarm enemies.