Welcome to Gaia! :: Swords are a weapon for cowards V2.0 | Forum

Register FaceBook Login Login

 

 
GST

Welcome to Gaia's forums, where millions of members gather to discuss random stuff, make new friends,
complain about life, argue about nothing, laugh at dumb pictures, discuss serious issues and/or curse like sailors.

Lurking is creepy. Quit skulking in the shadows and join the conversation!

Register to reply

Advertisement
Share:  
forum:26, topic:44485397
GunsmithKitten
Passionate Rape
Actually, I think to retain all honor in battle combatants should go hand to hand.


Ahhhh that makes rule by whoever has a few hundred pounds and a better physique. Sounds fair. rolleyes

******** that noise. If I'm defending myself against you, I don't give a flying ******** about fairness or honor. You're getting shot/cut.
Hurrrr... yer purdy.



I don't care who you are or how much training you have, taking this dude down is going to be TOUGH. Especially in a world where the physically fit are used to having no opposition.
 
     
 
Dreadghost
Fresnel
Dreadghost
Fresnel
Dreadghost
Not really, hitting someone with a flat might hurt, but would make your swing slow and he/she would have enough time to get the better of you. You see, a stick doesn't have an edge that needs to be used.
Dunno about you, but I always acted like it did. razz

Vertical strikes don't work too well with a tree, and they're not fun. So long as you don't move your grip, the same two sides are always going to hit the target. Assume those are the blades, and there you have it.

Quote:
What catch is to baseball is more like what modern sport fencing is to an actual hostile situation (of course, both assailants are using swords). A better comparison is using a broom to paint the house, sure it has hairs like a brush, and in a way works like one. But they are not at all the same when you wield them properly.
But in the end, the house is painted. One just does a far better job of it.
I don't quite understand this part. Are you saying you can't strike vertically with a sword?
Not against the trees I fought. More often than not it gets stuck on an overhanging branch. Also, it was fifty times more fun to use horizontal strikes. I don't know why, it just was.

Quote:
Right, but assuming gets you no where. You can use a stick and throw twigs and assume those are its bullets, doesn't quite mean its an accurate comparison with a gun.
Pick up any sword, hold the blade with edges parallel to the ground, and swing it horizontally. Are you EVER going to hit something with the dull sides?

I suppose I'm assuming a double-sided sword here, but it's not like those are rare.

Quote:
So maybe it is painted, but are you now going to say a paint brush is just a glorified broom? Doesn't sound right when you put it in that perspective, does it?
Paint brushes didn't evolve from brooms (as far as I know, at least). Swords are the end of the ten-thousand-year evolution of sticks as a weapon.

Quote:
A stick and a sword are two different tools, that is, if you look at the stick as a weapon not a material. Its silly to wield a sword like you would a club(stick) and vice versa. They may be slightly similar, but by far not the same. But this goes for all tools. I understand people generally thinking the two are used the same, probably because they are melee weapons, but that's like saying a gun and a bow is used in the same way.
Guns and bows can be surprisingly similar. The basic principles of marksmanship apply to both, but the basic operation differs completely.

I think though, that if you took someone trained with a mechanical-release bow, gave them a bolt-action rifle and some ammo, and let them figure it out on their own... it wouldn't take long for them to have it figured out pretty well.
Are you sure swords evolved from sticks? I would think a flint cutter would be more like it. Well, that is to say if it really did evolve like that.
Well it's not like I have any PROOF here, but I'm expecting an intermediary step along the lines of the Aztec obsidian-bladed clubs.

Quote:
I am still not sure with the holding part. Not to mention angling your edge to your target doesn't go in 4 different degrees. And if I swing a stick I hardly angle it perfectly with my hand, its not needed at all.
No, but perfect angling isn't absolutely required with most blades either. Not that I've ever killed a man or anything, but if you hit a tree with a hatchet that's off-angle by 10° or so, it'll bounce off, but so will a chunk of tree the size of a finger.
     
@Fresnel: Something like:

this?

(Believe it or not that guy's cosplaying an anime character. And doing it about as well as anyone can cosplay that character, who in the anime itself is inhumanly large.)
 
     

There's a man goin' 'round takin' names,
and he decides who to free, and who to blame.
Everybody will be treated
all the same.
 
Fresnel
Dreadghost
Fresnel
Dreadghost
Fresnel
Dunno about you, but I always acted like it did. razz

Vertical strikes don't work too well with a tree, and they're not fun. So long as you don't move your grip, the same two sides are always going to hit the target. Assume those are the blades, and there you have it.

But in the end, the house is painted. One just does a far better job of it.
I don't quite understand this part. Are you saying you can't strike vertically with a sword?
Not against the trees I fought. More often than not it gets stuck on an overhanging branch. Also, it was fifty times more fun to use horizontal strikes. I don't know why, it just was.

Quote:
Right, but assuming gets you no where. You can use a stick and throw twigs and assume those are its bullets, doesn't quite mean its an accurate comparison with a gun.
Pick up any sword, hold the blade with edges parallel to the ground, and swing it horizontally. Are you EVER going to hit something with the dull sides?

I suppose I'm assuming a double-sided sword here, but it's not like those are rare.

Quote:
So maybe it is painted, but are you now going to say a paint brush is just a glorified broom? Doesn't sound right when you put it in that perspective, does it?
Paint brushes didn't evolve from brooms (as far as I know, at least). Swords are the end of the ten-thousand-year evolution of sticks as a weapon.

Quote:
A stick and a sword are two different tools, that is, if you look at the stick as a weapon not a material. Its silly to wield a sword like you would a club(stick) and vice versa. They may be slightly similar, but by far not the same. But this goes for all tools. I understand people generally thinking the two are used the same, probably because they are melee weapons, but that's like saying a gun and a bow is used in the same way.
Guns and bows can be surprisingly similar. The basic principles of marksmanship apply to both, but the basic operation differs completely.

I think though, that if you took someone trained with a mechanical-release bow, gave them a bolt-action rifle and some ammo, and let them figure it out on their own... it wouldn't take long for them to have it figured out pretty well.
Are you sure swords evolved from sticks? I would think a flint cutter would be more like it. Well, that is to say if it really did evolve like that.
Well it's not like I have any PROOF here, but I'm expecting an intermediary step along the lines of the Aztec obsidian-bladed clubs.

Quote:
I am still not sure with the holding part. Not to mention angling your edge to your target doesn't go in 4 different degrees. And if I swing a stick I hardly angle it perfectly with my hand, its not needed at all.
No, but perfect angling isn't absolutely required with most blades either. Not that I've ever killed a man or anything, but if you hit a tree with a hatchet that's off-angle by 10° or so, it'll bounce off, but so will a chunk of tree the size of a finger.
Right. but in a combat situation you want to take down an assailant. Not per se kill him, but make sure he can't attack any more.

What I am trying to say here is a stick and sword are two bad comparisons, a stick and club are great so are a sword and an axe, or maybe even a knife. Let me put it this way: comparing a stick with a sword is kind of like comparing artillery with say, a simple hand gun. Now I understand you can't "wield" artillery like you would a hand gun, but to be honest, you can't really wield any tool like you would the other. It pretty much contradicts the word.
     
Fresnel
GunsmithKitten
Passionate Rape
Actually, I think to retain all honor in battle combatants should go hand to hand.


Ahhhh that makes rule by whoever has a few hundred pounds and a better physique. Sounds fair. rolleyes

******** that noise. If I'm defending myself against you, I don't give a flying ******** about fairness or honor. You're getting shot/cut.
Hurrrr... yer purdy.



I don't care who you are or how much training you have, taking this dude down is going to be TOUGH. Especially in a world where the physically fit are used to having no opposition.
I think a firearm would be plenty enough, all though I recently shot with a .22 and a 9 mm (mind you I don't know that much about firearms, I lost interest since I can't use them over here). I wouldn't use the .22 on him though, probably would just piss him off.
 
     
 
Dreadghost
Fresnel
Dreadghost
Fresnel
Dreadghost
I don't quite understand this part. Are you saying you can't strike vertically with a sword?
Not against the trees I fought. More often than not it gets stuck on an overhanging branch. Also, it was fifty times more fun to use horizontal strikes. I don't know why, it just was.

Quote:
Right, but assuming gets you no where. You can use a stick and throw twigs and assume those are its bullets, doesn't quite mean its an accurate comparison with a gun.
Pick up any sword, hold the blade with edges parallel to the ground, and swing it horizontally. Are you EVER going to hit something with the dull sides?

I suppose I'm assuming a double-sided sword here, but it's not like those are rare.

Quote:
So maybe it is painted, but are you now going to say a paint brush is just a glorified broom? Doesn't sound right when you put it in that perspective, does it?
Paint brushes didn't evolve from brooms (as far as I know, at least). Swords are the end of the ten-thousand-year evolution of sticks as a weapon.

Quote:
A stick and a sword are two different tools, that is, if you look at the stick as a weapon not a material. Its silly to wield a sword like you would a club(stick) and vice versa. They may be slightly similar, but by far not the same. But this goes for all tools. I understand people generally thinking the two are used the same, probably because they are melee weapons, but that's like saying a gun and a bow is used in the same way.
Guns and bows can be surprisingly similar. The basic principles of marksmanship apply to both, but the basic operation differs completely.

I think though, that if you took someone trained with a mechanical-release bow, gave them a bolt-action rifle and some ammo, and let them figure it out on their own... it wouldn't take long for them to have it figured out pretty well.
Are you sure swords evolved from sticks? I would think a flint cutter would be more like it. Well, that is to say if it really did evolve like that.
Well it's not like I have any PROOF here, but I'm expecting an intermediary step along the lines of the Aztec obsidian-bladed clubs.

Quote:
I am still not sure with the holding part. Not to mention angling your edge to your target doesn't go in 4 different degrees. And if I swing a stick I hardly angle it perfectly with my hand, its not needed at all.
No, but perfect angling isn't absolutely required with most blades either. Not that I've ever killed a man or anything, but if you hit a tree with a hatchet that's off-angle by 10° or so, it'll bounce off, but so will a chunk of tree the size of a finger.
Right. but in a combat situation you want to take down an assailant. Not per se kill him, but make sure he can't attack any more.

What I am trying to say here is a stick and sword are two bad comparisons, a stick and club are great so are a sword and an axe, or maybe even a knife. Let me put it this way: comparing a stick with a sword is kind of like comparing artillery with say, a simple hand gun. Now I understand you can't "wield" artillery like you would a hand gun, but to be honest, you can't really wield any tool like you would the other. It pretty much contradicts the word.
In trying to find the actual name for those Aztec clubs, I ran across a reference to another weapon the Aztex used. It was essentially a wooden sword, but it had been sharpened to give it a dangerous edge. It's a stick, it's a sword...

Imagine you were wielding a stick like a sword, say a broom handle... fight like your opponent is wearing heavy armor. Would that not be quite effective?
     
Dreadghost
Fresnel
GunsmithKitten
Passionate Rape
Actually, I think to retain all honor in battle combatants should go hand to hand.


Ahhhh that makes rule by whoever has a few hundred pounds and a better physique. Sounds fair. rolleyes

******** that noise. If I'm defending myself against you, I don't give a flying ******** about fairness or honor. You're getting shot/cut.
Hurrrr... yer purdy.



I don't care who you are or how much training you have, taking this dude down is going to be TOUGH. Especially in a world where the physically fit are used to having no opposition.
I think a firearm would be plenty enough, all though I recently shot with a .22 and a 9 mm (mind you I don't know that much about firearms, I lost interest since I can't use them over here). I wouldn't use the .22 on him though, probably would just piss him off.
Against a brute like him, I'd want to go as big as I could handle. But I was referring to fighting him hand-to-hand.
 
     
 
Fresnel
Dreadghost
Fresnel
GunsmithKitten
Passionate Rape
Actually, I think to retain all honor in battle combatants should go hand to hand.


Ahhhh that makes rule by whoever has a few hundred pounds and a better physique. Sounds fair. rolleyes

******** that noise. If I'm defending myself against you, I don't give a flying ******** about fairness or honor. You're getting shot/cut.
Hurrrr... yer purdy.



I don't care who you are or how much training you have, taking this dude down is going to be TOUGH. Especially in a world where the physically fit are used to having no opposition.
I think a firearm would be plenty enough, all though I recently shot with a .22 and a 9 mm (mind you I don't know that much about firearms, I lost interest since I can't use them over here). I wouldn't use the .22 on him though, probably would just piss him off.
Against a brute like him, I'd want to go as big as I could handle. But I was referring to fighting him hand-to-hand.



Something just occurred to me: What if you were that guy and being mugged by some pipsqueak with a gun? Wouldn't it skeeve you greatly to have done all that exercise and possibly martial arts training just to be brought down by some d**k with a .38 special?

     
My Full Sig

"Ninety percent of the casualties of WWI were soldiers, fraulein. But half the people who died in WWII were civilians. Half of 61 million. I know why I'm fighting, fraulein. I don't want to see WWIII."
I am certain this argument has been made somewhere in the last 803 or so pages of this post, but it was not in the OP so I am going to make it anyways.

If the question is about honor then I think the parameters are off. I understand people like to argue the point because so many are fans of both.

How can you compare which weapon (remember its an inanimate object) is more honorable (this is a trait or value, usually given to a living person who acts.)?

Being that Honor is itself a value, it can only be ascribed to someone who acts, or to an act itself. A sword is not more honorable than a gun. A gun is not more honorable than a sword.

In the OP, the author mentioned sneaky killing, or assassination. I would call it an ambush. Either way with either weapon he classified it as dishonorable and I agree. However, this is my point. The act of killing someone without them knowing it is what is lacking in honor, not the weapon that was used.

So the debate should end right there. It is not the choice of weapon but how the weapon is used. It is the actual engagement, not what the combatants are armed with.

-LTD
 
     
"Superhuman is a state of mind." -Me
 
AsuraSyn
Fresnel
Dreadghost
Fresnel
GunsmithKitten
Passionate Rape
Actually, I think to retain all honor in battle combatants should go hand to hand.


Ahhhh that makes rule by whoever has a few hundred pounds and a better physique. Sounds fair. rolleyes

******** that noise. If I'm defending myself against you, I don't give a flying ******** about fairness or honor. You're getting shot/cut.
Hurrrr... yer purdy.



I don't care who you are or how much training you have, taking this dude down is going to be TOUGH. Especially in a world where the physically fit are used to having no opposition.
I think a firearm would be plenty enough, all though I recently shot with a .22 and a 9 mm (mind you I don't know that much about firearms, I lost interest since I can't use them over here). I wouldn't use the .22 on him though, probably would just piss him off.
Against a brute like him, I'd want to go as big as I could handle. But I was referring to fighting him hand-to-hand.



Something just occurred to me: What if you were that guy and being mugged by some pipsqueak with a gun? Wouldn't it skeeve you greatly to have done all that exercise and possibly martial arts training just to be brought down by some d**k with a .38 special?



As a bodybuilder, let me tell you that if you do all that work, just so that you can beat up muggers, you deserve to be shot.
     

Fresnel
Angel: Solving every situation with &******** [pronoun]"
Fresnel
In trying to find the actual name for those Aztec clubs, I ran across a reference to another weapon the Aztex used. It was essentially a wooden sword, but it had been sharpened to give it a dangerous edge. It's a stick, it's a sword...

Imagine you were wielding a stick like a sword, say a broom handle... fight like your opponent is wearing heavy armor. Would that not be quite effective?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macahuitl

Lethal bloody things.
 
     
Barton #118
 
Sir Doober
Fresnel
In trying to find the actual name for those Aztec clubs, I ran across a reference to another weapon the Aztex used. It was essentially a wooden sword, but it had been sharpened to give it a dangerous edge. It's a stick, it's a sword...

Imagine you were wielding a stick like a sword, say a broom handle... fight like your opponent is wearing heavy armor. Would that not be quite effective?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macahuitl

Lethal bloody things.
Close, but not quite. That's the one that specifically had obsidian chips in it. They made another version without the chips, and it was still sharp enough to be lethal.

I hear obsidian makes an incredible cut though. And it heals faster than an equal cut with a steel implement. They're considering a brand of scalpels with obsidian blades, to reduce post-op scarring... or so I hear.
     
Always outnumbered, never outgunned.

http://tinyurl.com/2zyubj
Now hiring.
Luc_422
I am certain this argument has been made somewhere in the last 803 or so pages of this post, but it was not in the OP so I am going to make it anyways.

If the question is about honor then I think the parameters are off. I understand people like to argue the point because so many are fans of both.

How can you compare which weapon (remember its an inanimate object) is more honorable (this is a trait or value, usually given to a living person who acts.)?


And thus, you understand the premise of this debate.
 
     
http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/political-pictures-medvedev-putin-fake-real.jpg
Vote for me in the Art Arena

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

We will be phasing out support for your browser soon.

Please upgrade to one of these more modern browsers.