who would win: samurai or knight?

Erza · Sep 13, 2009 2:12 AM

Blaze the Dragon wrote:

Okay... a question The New Age of Cynder; if arrows have a single, narrow point, how can they pierce chainmail, when a sharp tip of a blade cannot? An arrowhead, it could be considered, is stabbing through the chainmail.

the chain mail underneath the plate armour is made of rings joined together, right? an arrow is thin enough to penetrate a single ring. but a sword cannot, because the blade to to thick. Ive been to a demonstration at an old medieval castle. thats why i know quite a bit about this. plus, i studied medieval knights at the start of this year.

Scaily · Sep 13, 2009 2:21 AM

true but do you realy need to cut thim the hard blows alone can break ribs and thin possibly cause enternal punchers and bleeding

Erza · Sep 13, 2009 2:24 AM

thats why the knights wore a highly padded gown underneath the plate and chain armour. to stop blows that could break bones and whatnot

Scaily · Sep 13, 2009 2:44 AM

sorry to kill your point but look back to the british vs the irish the tide was turned in the battaal of the bridge because the irish kill off the knights by dismounting thim and attacking thim with anything pointy makeing thim bleed to death samuria are known for there swords man ship yes but if one merly fought for the intense feeling thayy also took a smaller blade with thim incase of harukiri being needed

Blaze the Dragon · Sep 13, 2009 2:48 AM

And actually a sword's blade can be honed to be thin at the tip and pierce chainmail.

Scaily · Sep 13, 2009 8:22 AM

Blaze the Dragon wrote:

And actually a sword's blade can be honed to be thin at the tip and pierce chainmail.

so so true but thin theres the slight issue of the blades condition

Blaze the Dragon · Sep 13, 2009 2:35 PM

The katana is a thin blade, and yet it still manages to hold well. Unlike a thick blade of a longsword it can pierce the chainmail with a slash.

A Guy · Sep 13, 2009 6:59 PM

Blaze the Dragon wrote:

And actually A Guy, samurai weren't just skilled swordsmen. They were also renowned for their skill in mounted archery, surpassed only by the Mongols. And, as we know, the archers eventually brought about the end of knights. Ergo, a samurai would still be an even match for a knight.

I've mentioned this loads of times, look back. Unless the knight is wielding an arbalest (which can kill most anyone with a single shot), the samurai is guaranteed a win at range.

Plate mail is resistant to slashing - chain mail, not so much.

Also, mounting a horse wouldn't be a wise move for either side, considering both have weapons made to take down horsemen.

Scaily · Sep 13, 2009 7:21 PM

Blaze the Dragon wrote:

The katana is a thin blade, and yet it still manages to hold well. Unlike a thick blade of a longsword it can pierce the chainmail with a slash.

you have a decent point ^^

#51 Sep 13, 2009 2:12 AM

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

#52 Sep 13, 2009 2:21 AM

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

#53 Sep 13, 2009 2:24 AM

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

#54 Sep 13, 2009 2:44 AM

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

#55 Sep 13, 2009 2:48 AM

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

#56 Sep 13, 2009 8:22 AM

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

#57 Sep 13, 2009 2:35 PM

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

#58 Sep 13, 2009 6:59 PM

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

#59 Sep 13, 2009 7:21 PM

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

Board footer