Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: TopCat <topcat@**.CENCOM.NET>
Subject: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 1995 18:27:57 -0500
Katanas are far from the "perfect" blade that many seem to think they are.
It would be considered blasphemy (and a waste of a good sword) to swing a
katana at a cinderblock. The sword (if it survived at all) would be
seriously marred. Whereas on numerous occasions I have watched
European-style swords go through those and come away without any damage.
Stab a breastplate head on with a katana? Better be ready to get a new
sword or work on the tip for the next year or so. Any decently made blade
will go thru that easily without any mushrooming or chipping of the tip.
Katanas simply cannot do that. Katanas are very similar to rapiers in their
use. Very sharp, very impressive against weak to no armor. They'll slice
through flesh far better than the average longsword. But if you can't get
to that flesh, you're in trouble. Swing a sword that can go through
cinderblocks with ease and you'll get through most armor without any
problem. The force of the blow alone will incapacitate the target. You may
not make the pretty slices that a katana can, but there is definitely
something to be said for a large, jagged cut and it's effect on morale <G>.

Just thought I'd throw this out there before the katana-worshippers got too
vocal.

-- TopCat
Message no. 2
From: Duke Diener <DukeDragon@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 01:29:02 -0400
-- TopCat wrote:

>Katanas are far from the "perfect" blade that many seem to think they are.
>It would be considered blasphemy (and a waste of a good sword) to swing a
>katana at a cinderblock. The sword (if it survived at all) would be
>seriously marred. Whereas on numerous occasions I have watched
>European-style swords go through those and come away without any damage.
>Stab a breastplate head on with a katana? Better be ready to get a new
>sword or work on the tip for the next year or so. Any decently made blade
>will go thru that easily without any mushrooming or chipping of the tip.
>Katanas simply cannot do that. Katanas are very similar to rapiers in their
>use. Very sharp, very impressive against weak to no armor. They'll slice
>through flesh far better than the average longsword. But if you can't get
>to that flesh, you're in trouble. Swing a sword that can go through
>cinderblocks with ease and you'll get through most armor without any
>problem. The force of the blow alone will incapacitate the target. You may
>not make the pretty slices that a katana can, but there is definitely
>something to be said for a large, jagged cut and it's effect on morale <G>.
>
>Just thought I'd throw this out there before the katana-worshippers got too
>vocal.
>

Are you using the same Katanas we are, or did you get yours from K-Mart? I'm
affraid I must strongly disagree with you. They used to test the sharpness
of Katanas, after the sword had been sharpened after a battle, by chopping
the dead bodies of their enemies in half with them. Katanas are increadibly
strong especially in their transverse axis. Admitedly you would not want to
chop down a door with one but that is more a factor of the katanas relative
lack of weight than its lack of resilience.

Duke
Message no. 3
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 08:16:36 -0500
As a collector of swords, I wanted to make a couple of comments.

Katanas are wonderous weapons, but they do have significant weaknesses.
Those weaknesses, however, are irrelevant when you look at the era and
area where a katana is used.

Heavier, european blades are also good weapons, but also have weaknesses.
These are also irrlevant when you look at the era and area where these
blades are used.

Katana's are excellent at slicing, and fair at thrusting and chopping.
Depending on the blade, the european blades are rated good in slicing and
chopping, and excellent at thrusting (remember, in general. different
blades have different purposes).

A Katana can seldom if ever win against a knight in platemail armour.
Likewise, an unarmored Scotsman wielding a two-handed sword will lose
every time to a well-wielded Katana.

Katanas have the benefits of being exceedingly light and easy to wield,
with a long, dangerous edge, and a fairly good thrust. However, that's
pointless against most european armours. Pound for pound, a katana is a
better weapon. However, they are like comparing apples and volkswagons,
not even in the same area.

Oh well, take this for what you will.
(Most recent aquisition: 56" Spanish Hand-and-a-half broadsword)

____ Robert A. Hayden <=> Cthulhu Matata
\ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
\/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu
\/ Finger for PGP Public Key <=> http://att2.cs.mankato.msus.edu/~hayden

******************************
** Random Babylon 5 Quote **
******************************
"Someday I'm going to find the guy that thought up the idea of renting
telepaths to businessman and I'm going to kill him."
'Funny, I just knew you were going to say that.'
-- Businessman and Lyta Alexander, "The Gathering"
Message no. 4
From: Todd James Gillespie <toddg@****.ACS.UNT.EDU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 11:31:23 -0500
On Sat, 1 Jul 1995, Robert A. Hayden wrote:

> Katana's are excellent at slicing, and fair at thrusting and chopping.
> Depending on the blade, the european blades are rated good in slicing and
> chopping, and excellent at thrusting (remember, in general. different
> blades have different purposes).
>
> A Katana can seldom if ever win against a knight in platemail armour.
> Likewise, an unarmored Scotsman wielding a two-handed sword will lose
> every time to a well-wielded Katana.

The euro blades have more significant faults because of this - if the
justification is their use primarily against armored kniggets (nee!),
then it should be noted that swords proved to be a poor weapon against
plate armor. That is one reason why the armored knight with sword fell
from glory. Hammers and long spiked maces proved to be better at
handling plate armor (not to mention the welsh longbow). The shift to
h's & m's was the last step in a conversion that took most of the middle
ages, that being that they saw that slashing armor was absurd, so swords
continually became larger and more bludgeon-like. The edge became less
important than the hunk of metal behind it.

One more important point. Katanas are the overwhelming best for
shadowrunning. Lightweight, deft, lightweight, more concealable,
lightweight, better for combat, and no one is walking around in plate
armor.
('what about military armor?,' you snidely ask. " Get the friggin troll with
the dual assault cannons out there." duh.)
Message no. 5
From: Sinbad Sam <sinbad@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 13:04:47 +0000
Robert A. Hayden wrote:

As a collector of swords, I wanted to make a couple of comments.

---snip some of the good stuff-----

Oh well, take this for what you will.
(Most recent aquisition: 56" Spanish Hand-and-a-half broadsword)

____ Robert A. Hayden <=> Cthulhu Matata
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert have you ever seen a a sword made by Daniel of Angel Sword of
Austin? He uses the folding techniques, Damascus Steel and other
exotic methods. In a demostration he can hammer a small blade thru
fifty cent piece without any damage to the blade. The blade used
in the demo was made using the folding technique.

The thing that the katana versus euro sword is overlooking is what
"modern" technology can give to the lightwieght blades of all types,
ie better basic metals and improved forging methods.

Sinbad Sam
sinbad@********.com

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.2

mQCNAi3tSRYAAAEEAJWWEBoq+Vsg3Bqf9sg+ONGuAIlETBIx1FNbvxJlNm1zZwKf
aNZE8BUrJ86ALkllWu+4JmsHmDPBZl5VBqWUgRDkhir1ZU6s/o0YJxe0UFEvwVoN
l7P1SVCKoBjl/lwHdxceo82MmpqL/cUklLMTLJILh+Pfr18vvWgJ5IDohLGVAAUT
tBlTYW0gRC4gVGhvbWFzIDxTdGhvbWFzMjM+
=E/HK
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Message no. 6
From: SilverFire <SSHERMAN@****.STEVENS-TECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 16:54:30 -0500
On Sat, 1 Jul 1995, Todd James Gillespie wrote:

> One more important point. Katanas are the overwhelming best for
> shadowrunning.

That isn't necessarily true. The ares monosword is a very nice
blade as well. It is just as lightweight, has a slightly better
concealability is one handed, and does as much damge. I know you all are
comparing various swords from various times and places.
'Nother note. Increasing usage of the rapier at the beginning of the
renaissance, end of middle ages helped to put an end to various kinds of
armor. Chain mail is useless against a rapier, and an experienced fencer
could get his rapier into chinks in plate armor. Also the guy with the
rapier is faster than the guy in the plate armor with a two handed sword
that is longer than I am tall.

Well that's my $0.02.


SilverFire

*******************************************************************************
Love could be so damn resilient, or it could be as fragile as glass. And like
broken glass, it could cut you so you bled to death. Love could be so damn
resilient.
Where does reality end and illusion begin?

Mary Rosenbaum
_Chimera_
Message no. 7
From: "S.F. Eley" <gt6877c@*****.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 17:59:18 -0400
> Robert have you ever seen a a sword made by Daniel of Angel Sword of
> Austin? He uses the folding techniques, Damascus Steel and other
> exotic methods. In a demostration he can hammer a small blade thru
> fifty cent piece without any damage to the blade. The blade used
> in the demo was made using the folding technique.

Angel Sword? Blehhh... I've seen them at RenFests. $200+ for thin,
fragile-looking daggers and some sales pitch about "living steel" that
channels energy a zillion times better because of arcane alloy techniques
and the Colonel's eleven herbs and spices. I know something about energy;
I was less than impressed.

That demonstration you were talking about.. Folding wouldn't make any
difference if you were going to hammer a blade straight down like that.
Used such, the knife isn't a knife anymore -- it's a nail, and ANY piece
of solid metal would do as well. As someone said just recently, folding
strengthens the transverse axis (the side that is folded along). No need
for much of that in a tiny little knife, as chances are you won't be doing
edge-on combat with it.

Note that I'm only criticizing Angel Sword and its inaccurate marketing,
not the idea of folding or modern steel techniques. For all I know, Angel
Sword may use Damascus steel, but not in any of the swords I saw. A
friend of mine once had the opportunity to see Damascus steel being made..
He says they fold it so many times, the surface actually shimmers with all
the waves and folds. A blade made with it looks like it's in motion even
when it's lying still.



> The thing that the katana versus euro sword is overlooking is what
> "modern" technology can give to the lightwieght blades of all types,
> ie better basic metals and improved forging methods.

Yes, but that doesn't mean you'll find better blades than the old ones
common or affordable. Quantity and cost usually override actual worth..
I've no reason to see it any different in Shadowrun. Sturgeon's Law always
prevails: "Ninety percent of everything is crap." >8->


Blessings,

_TNX._

--
Stephen F. Eley (-) gt6877c@*****.gatech.edu )-( Student Pagan Community
http://wc62.residence.gatech.edu| Jesus Saves,
My opinions are my opinions. | Moses Invests,
Please don't blame anyone else. | But only Buddha pays dividends!
Message no. 8
From: Sinbad Sam <sinbad@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 18:49:07 +0000
S.F. Eley wrote:

> Angel Sword? Blehhh... I've seen them at RenFests. $200+ for thin,
> fragile-looking daggers and some sales pitch about "living steel" that
> channels energy a zillion times better because of arcane alloy techniques
> and the Colonel's eleven herbs and spices. I know something about energy;
> I was less than impressed.

I have used the blades that Daniel makes, appearances in swords can
be very deceiving. If you new how much effort went into the
manufacturing those "thin, fragile-looking daggers" you might
understand the pricing, but at most RenFests pricing is high. If you
talked to Daniel you would find out that you could put one on "lay
away". He also knows something about energy.

> That demonstration you were talking about.. Folding wouldn't make any
> difference if you were going to hammer a blade straight down like that.
> Used such, the knife isn't a knife anymore -- it's a nail, and ANY piece
> of solid metal would do as well. As someone said just recently, folding
> strengthens the transverse axis (the side that is folded along). No need
> for much of that in a tiny little knife, as chances are you won't be doing
> edge-on combat with it.

You missed my point, that modern techniques can make a light weight
edged weapon capable of pentrating metals ie armors. But not just any
metal can be a nail without showing signs of physical passage thru
another metal. You are almost correct about the folding. As to combat
depends upon the chances that the fight situation gives you. You need
to well versed in all uses of your edged wepon.

> Note that I'm only criticizing Angel Sword and its inaccurate marketing,
> not the idea of folding or modern steel techniques. For all I know, Angel
> Sword may use Damascus steel, but not in any of the swords I saw. A
> friend of mine once had the opportunity to see Damascus steel being made..
> He says they fold it so many times, the surface actually shimmers with all
> the waves and folds. A blade made with it looks like it's in motion even
> when it's lying still.

But is not all marketing inaccurate?

I have seen several of his Damascus Steel he one of the Few on this
side of the Blue A that does well. Your friends description very
accurate for an observer, but there are other features too.

> Yes, but that doesn't mean you'll find better blades than the old ones
> common or affordable. Quantity and cost usually override actual worth..
> I've no reason to see it any different in Shadowrun. Sturgeon's Law always
> prevails: "Ninety percent of everything is crap." >8->

You are very correct about the pricing of a fine Blade, but I do not
see this trend ending with VITAS.<G>

Sinbad Sam
sinbad@********.com
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.2

mQCNAi3tSRYAAAEEAJWWEBoq+Vsg3Bqf9sg+ONGuAIlETBIx1FNbvxJlNm1zZwKf
aNZE8BUrJ86ALkllWu+4JmsHmDPBZl5VBqWUgRDkhir1ZU6s/o0YJxe0UFEvwVoN
l7P1SVCKoBjl/lwHdxceo82MmpqL/cUklLMTLJILh+Pfr18vvWgJ5IDohLGVAAUT
tBlTYW0gRC4gVGhvbWFzIDxTdGhvbWFzMjM+
=E/HK
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Message no. 9
From: Forgotten Horror <phinar@**.CENCOM.NET>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 19:53:19 EDT
> That isn't necessarily true. The ares monosword is a very nice
>blade as well. It is just as lightweight, has a slightly better
>concealability is one handed, and does as much damge. I know you all are
>comparing various swords from various times and places.

Just to add more blither to an already hopelessly vague thread: how is
it just as lightweight? My copy o' the rules says it outweighs the
katana by a full kilo ... not that a monokatana would be unwelcome.


<G>
(phinar@******.net)
Message no. 10
From: Duke Diener <DukeDragon@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 21:32:50 -0400
SilverFire wrote:

> 'Nother note. Increasing usage of the rapier at the beginning of the
>renaissance, end of middle ages helped to put an end to various kinds of
>armor.

I believe that the Rapier, Epee, etc. gained in popularity along with the
rise of firearms on the battle field. The larger swords are excellent for
hewing through a mass of enemy bodies, but as firearms became more prevalent
and the range of combat increased the advantage of being able to injure many
enemy with a single swipe was completely negated. Since swords were worn for
decoration and dueling a lighter, faster blade was preferable (I mean who has
time to go home and put on all that armor when ones' honor has been
besmirched!). I agree with Todd...light weight...and remember:

Speed is life!!!!

Duke
Message no. 11
From: TopCat <topcat@**.CENCOM.NET>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 00:56:38 -0500
In response to Duke's words on the subject...

Katanas may well be able to cut through a body. But put that body in full
armor and they do little more than slide off harmlessly. Swing any
well-made European-style blade at the same armored body and you'll get far
more impressive results. As has been explained, katanas are beautiful
against unarmored opponents... monstrous European blades are good against
armor, but too unweildy to be of great effect against unarmored foes.

No, I do not get my katanas at K-mart. I watch displays at Renaissance
festivals and martial arts conventions. I assume that you get yours from
comic books or movies?

-- TopCat
Message no. 12
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 10:53:59 GMT
> >Katanas are far from the "perfect" blade that many seem to think they
are.
> >It would be considered blasphemy (and a waste of a good sword) to swing a
> >katana at a cinderblock. The sword (if it survived at all) would be
> >seriously marred. Whereas on numerous occasions I have watched
> >European-style swords go through those and come away without any damage.

Several of the Korean and Chinese "martial arts weapons" - adapted farm
implements, mostly - work on the principle that most katanas, struck a
hard enough blow, could be induced to delaminate and shatter. That superb
metallurgy could be a drawback unless it was executed very carefully: fold
the steel too fast or too slow and you get decarburisation or oxide layers,
neither of which do the finished blade any good at all.

> >Stab a breastplate head on with a katana? Better be ready to get a new
> >sword or work on the tip for the next year or so. Any decently made blade
> >will go thru that easily without any mushrooming or chipping of the tip.
> >Katanas simply cannot do that.

Maybe not: but look at the tanto Cold Steel make. They advertise it by
hammering it through a car door, without damage to the point.

> >Katanas are very similar to rapiers in their
> >use. Very sharp, very impressive against weak to no armor. They'll slice
> >through flesh far better than the average longsword. But if you can't get
> >to that flesh, you're in trouble. Swing a sword that can go through
> >cinderblocks with ease and you'll get through most armor without any
> >problem. The force of the blow alone will incapacitate the target. You may
> >not make the pretty slices that a katana can, but there is definitely
> >something to be said for a large, jagged cut and it's effect on morale <G>.

A long time ago I saw James Burke on "Connections" showing off a replica of a
Norman sword, forged in the manner of sometime before 1066. Basically a
wrought-iron blade with reasonable edges. He demonstrated it on a side of
beef. The first swing cut it nearly in half. There is a tendency to disparage
European swords, but there are a great many skeletons killed by those
"inefficient" weapons.

> Are you using the same Katanas we are, or did you get yours from K-Mart? I'm
> affraid I must strongly disagree with you. They used to test the sharpness
> of Katanas, after the sword had been sharpened after a battle, by chopping
> the dead bodies of their enemies in half with them. Katanas are increadibly
> strong especially in their transverse axis. Admitedly you would not want to
> chop down a door with one but that is more a factor of the katanas relative
> lack of weight than its lack of resilience.

Again, different reasoning and design: the katana is very sharp, but so are
many European blades until you bash them against plate armour a few times.
The Western swords are rather better against plated or mailed opponents:
the katana is superior against less armour.

And cutting a dead body in half is not a real test of combat effectiveness:
as long as your enemy dies when you hit him, the blade is efficient :-)

Does anyone know of cases where katanas were used on foes in Western-style
metal armour and how the blades performed?

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 13
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 13:34:20 +0200
>Maybe not: but look at the tanto Cold Steel make.

Excuse me, what is "tanto Cold Steel make"?

>A long time ago I saw James Burke on "Connections" showing off a replica of
a
>Norman sword, forged in the manner of sometime before 1066. Basically a
>wrought-iron blade with reasonable edges. He demonstrated it on a side of
>beef. The first swing cut it nearly in half. There is a tendency to disparage
>European swords

Don't forget that the Norman swords were generally among the best in Europe
at that time. This also reminds me of that scene in Apocalypse Now, where
they are hacking at that cow with machettes -- that one guy chops half
through the animal's neck with one swing I believe.

>there are a great many skeletons killed by those
>"inefficient" weapons.

But don't skeletons suffer half damage from slashing weapons? *takes cover
beneath desk* :)


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
It's all about money, ain't a damn thing funny
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 14
From: Robert Watkins <bob@**.NTU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 21:26:39 +0930
SilverFire wrote:
>
> 'Nother note. Increasing usage of the rapier at the beginning of the
> renaissance, end of middle ages helped to put an end to various kinds of
> armor. Chain mail is useless against a rapier, and an experienced fencer
> could get his rapier into chinks in plate armor. Also the guy with the
> rapier is faster than the guy in the plate armor with a two handed sword
> that is longer than I am tall.

'Cept that speed is vital for the rapier. And speed means not much in the
way of armour. And not much in the way of armour means the archers are
going to slaughter you.

Heavy armour is for the battlefield, not the dueling room.

--
Robert Watkins bob@**.ntu.edu.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
*** Finger me for my geek code ***
Message no. 15
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 12:42:40 GMT
> One more important point. Katanas are the overwhelming best for
> shadowrunning. Lightweight, deft, lightweight, more concealable,
> lightweight, better for combat, and no one is walking around in plate
> armor.

I dunno... a katana would go through Kevlar like it wasn't there, but
I don't see even that sort of blade being able to slice the ceramic
or titanium inserts. Again, a heavy two-hander might be better to cause
impact trauma and crack the plates by brute force (the ceramic ones are
quite brittle): at the least have a chance to knock your opponent down
to give you a position advantage.

And a heavy sword, hitting someone in (say) the knee or elbow, could
break bone where a katana would skitter off the armour.

OTOH a well-wielded katana is fast and handy, and you can keep your defence
up and keep going for unarmoured areas... Both could kill you. Style and
personal preference, I suppose.

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 16
From: P Ward <P.Ward@**.CF.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 16:49:07 BST
SilverFire wrote:
>
> 'Nother note. Increasing usage of the rapier at the beginning of the
> renaissance, end of middle ages helped to put an end to various kinds of
> armor. Chain mail is useless against a rapier, and an experienced fencer
> could get his rapier into chinks in plate armor. Also the guy with the
> rapier is faster than the guy in the plate armor with a two handed sword
> that is longer than I am tall.

Oh c'mon, Top Cat has it right, surely the deal was that the heavy armour
was aon the way out due to gunfire going straight through it anyway, so you
were better off being able to dodge, or at least fall over and hide from it,
and still be able to get back up again...

Now the rapier is more of a gnetlemans weapons, where you can injure your
opponent, say a small cut, and leave him alive. Say for a first-blood duel.
I walways wandered about how you could safely (!) manage first blood when
you're swinging 4' of blade designed to cut limbs off.

Not too mention a rapier could be seen as an accessory to your excellent
dress sense, while 5-6' of claymore makes you a thug :-)

Phil (Renegade)

Phil (Renegade)
Message no. 17
From: Duke Diener <DukeDragon@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 17:39:20 -0400
-- TopCat wrote:

>Katanas may well be able to cut through a body. But put that body in full
>armor and they do little more than slide off harmlessly. Swing any
>well-made European-style blade at the same armored body and you'll get far
>more impressive results. As has been explained, katanas are beautiful
>against unarmored opponents... monstrous European blades are good against
>armor, but too unweildy to be of great effect against unarmored foes.
>
>No, I do not get my katanas at K-mart. I watch displays at Renaissance
>festivals and martial arts conventions. I assume that you get yours from
>comic books or movies?
>

Very respected sources you quote. Mine is Swords and Hilt Weapons (1993
ed.) by Micheal D. Coe, prof. of Anthropology, Peabody Museum of Natural
History, Yale University and eight of his colleagues with similar
credentials.

The point you danced around is that European blades have mass. European
blades have a decided advantage here, but they apply their greater mass over
a larger surface area (a duller edge) than the Katana, so the Katana has the
advantage there. So my question is now "How does all this apply to Shadowrun
in game terms?"

Duke
Message no. 18
From: Duke Diener <DukeDragon@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 17:36:18 -0400
Paul J. Adams wrote:

>And cutting a dead body in half is not a real test of combat effectiveness:
>as long as your enemy dies when you hit him, the blade is efficient :-)
>
>Does anyone know of cases where katanas were used on foes in Western-style
>metal armour and how the blades performed?

The cutting of the bodies was to test the edge of the weapon not as a
demonstration of combat effectiveness. But I used it as an example to show
that the Katana can cut and cut deeply. As to your second question I believe
due to Japans' isolationist policies for almost all of its' history that no
such battles ever took place. Of course even if they have/had we could all
argue about the interpretation of the out come.

Duke
Message no. 19
From: Forgotten Horror <phinar@**.CENCOM.NET>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 00:04:28 EDT
>No, I do not get my katanas at K-mart. I watch displays at Renaissance
>festivals and martial arts conventions. I assume that you get yours from
>comic books or movies?

OK, I'm really gettin' kinda sick of this holier-than-thou. Have you
ever seen the films of the katanas captured in WW2? The ones the
kendo-masters were dicing gun barrels with? Documentaries, chummer,
not drek. Yes, they were well-made katanas, but not the most
extraordinary of the lot.

Let's talk truth. The reason there were pikemen at all in the middle
ages is because knights were getting embarrassed. There are several
battles in which peasant footsoldiers played no role, and
fully-armored knights clashed on an open battlefield. The casualties
were more frequently from heatstroke than wounds; less than 10% of the
casualties in a battle involving pikemen. The battle would end when
the guys on one side got too tired to swing their swords from running
around in full armor and getting clubbed around. Knights with even a
*good* European broadsword would thrust, rather than slash, to
penetrate armor. The edges on most combat swords weren't even
sharpened. Go check your museums. Why? Because in practice, a
fully-armored man couldn't swing one of those monsters hard enough to
penetrate metal with the wedged edge. Let along get a reasonable range
of movement, all glory-tales aside.

If you want to (de)base your argument on historical circumstances, get
your facts straight. Do a little research. And then come yap about how
wonderful European swords are. Fact is, they're heavy. They're slow.
And against anything *but* a fully-armored man in metal plate or
chain, they're inferior to a well-made katana. They don't have the
speed or sharpness advantage of a katana. And they aren't any harder.


<G>
(phinar@******.net)
Message no. 20
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 12:24:49 +0200
>The point you danced around is that European blades have mass. European
>blades have a decided advantage here, but they apply their greater mass over
>a larger surface area (a duller edge) than the Katana, so the Katana has the
>advantage there. So my question is now "How does all this apply to Shadowrun
>in game terms?"

Give a katana armor-piercing qualities (i.e. half Impact or something)
against soft armors, and other swords not.


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
It's all about money, ain't a damn thing funny
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 21
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 10:11:24 -0400
>>>>> "Gurth" == Gurth <gurth@******.NL> writes:

Gurth> Give a katana armor-piercing qualities (i.e. half Impact or
Gurth> something) against soft armors, and other swords not.

You should include a requirement that there be some training in actually
using the sword correctly.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> \ Ingredients of Happy Fun Ball include an
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! \ unknown glowing substance which fell to
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox/ \ Earth, presumably from outer space.
Message no. 22
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 16:00:14 GMT
Gurth wore out his keyboard and clogged my hard disk to say....

> >Maybe not: but look at the tanto Cold Steel make.
> Excuse me, what is "tanto Cold Steel make"?

Cold Steel are a US knife manufacturer who produce excellent blades.
One of their products is a copy of the Japanese tanto, which they make
various claims for.

> Don't forget that the Norman swords were generally among the best in Europe
> at that time. This also reminds me of that scene in Apocalypse Now, where
> they are hacking at that cow with machettes -- that one guy chops half
> through the animal's neck with one swing I believe.

Whoops, yes, I forgot that :-) You don't need mystically sharp weapons
to inflict massive damage: a decent edge and a good swing will do.
My wife tells me "Look what Lorena Bobbit managed to do..." I'll just hide
in the back garden for a while until she puts the cleaver down and
stops giggling...

> >there are a great many skeletons killed by those
> >"inefficient" weapons.
>
> But don't skeletons suffer half damage from slashing weapons? *takes cover
> beneath desk* :)

Present carp! Load and make ready!

******THWAPPPPP!!!!!*******

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 23
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 13:26:57 -0400
>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Jonathan Adam
<Paul@********.demon.co.uk> writes:

Paul> Cold Steel are a US knife manufacturer who produce excellent
Paul> blades. One of their products is a copy of the Japanese tanto,
Paul> which they make various claims for.

Be warned. Most of these manufacturers are just that, manufacturers, not
craftsmen. Their blades may be Rockwell 440 steel, which is damn fine
steel, but they're stamped out by a machine with a die. Often they're
just solid steel, occasionally you can find something that's been folded
once or twice.

In other words, they're K-Mart brand blades, and they're likely to chip
or break under heavy use.

A good Japanese weapon, made by a craftsman, will start at at around
$1,000 for an antique large tanto or short sword, to upwards of $500,000
or more for a blade made in Japan on comission (remember, Japanese
swordsmiths don't make many blades, by law, and with a high demand they
can charge exhorbitant prices).

A weapon made outside of Japan but using the Japanese or Damascus
techniques will cost significantly less, ranging from several hundred
dollars for a knife to several thousand for a katana.

BTW, for those who might like to know, "blade" means just the steel
without any of the accessories; "sword" is the completed weapon with all
the accessories (tsuba, tsuka, saya, etc). The accessories can sometimes
cost more than the blade itself.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> \ Ingredients of Happy Fun Ball include an
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! \ unknown glowing substance which fell to
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox/ \ Earth, presumably from outer space.
Message no. 24
From: Sebastian Wiers <seb@***.RIPCO.COM>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 14:23:35 -0500
>
> >The point you danced around is that European blades have mass. European
> >blades have a decided advantage here, but they apply their greater mass over
> >a larger surface area (a duller edge) than the Katana, so the Katana has the
> >advantage there. So my question is now "How does all this apply to
Shadowrun
> >in game terms?"
>
> Give a katana armor-piercing qualities (i.e. half Impact or something)
> against soft armors, and other swords not.

Is this really apropriate? I had the impresion Kevlar blocked slicing quite
nicely, and was used for gloves in the meat packing buisiness, and that
balistic fabric is cut with lazers or high pressure abrasive slurry streams.
Besides, does shadowrun need another monowhip level weapon? The katana already
has ap qualities- str+3 is good pentration. The ranger compound bow is the only
muscle powered weapon that is better.
Message no. 25
From: Duke Diener <DukeDragon@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 15:54:29 -0400
rat wrote:

>.
>
>You should include a requirement that there be some training in actually
>using the sword correctly.

Isn't that covered by paying for the skill?
Message no. 26
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 16:34:11 -0400
On Mon, 3 Jul 1995, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:

> >>>>> "Gurth" == Gurth <gurth@******.NL> writes:
>
> Gurth> Give a katana armor-piercing qualities (i.e. half Impact or
> Gurth> something) against soft armors, and other swords not.
>
> You should include a requirement that there be some training in actually
> using the sword correctly.

The sword *already* has better impact armor reducing
capabilities. That's probably why it has a higher power level, neh.
Look at the freakin' game mechanics before y'all start changing things
around too much.

Marc
Message no. 27
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 16:42:49 -0400
On Mon, 3 Jul 1995, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:

> BTW, for those who might like to know, "blade" means just the steel
> without any of the accessories; "sword" is the completed weapon with all
> the accessories (tsuba, tsuka, saya, etc). The accessories can sometimes
> cost more than the blade itself.

Not to mention the menuki, which are often very intricately
carved and fashioned from precious materials.

Marc
Message no. 28
From: TopCat <topcat@**.CENCOM.NET>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 18:40:03 -0500
[snipped about "documentaries" where katanas sliced gun barrels]

I have watched quite a few documentaries on WWII. You might say it was a
passion of mine for a while. But one thing that I never saw was a katana
slice a gun barrel. Sorry to burst that particular bubble, but I honestly
don't feel such a documentary exists.

And as for European swords being used to stab as opposed to slash due to
armor improvements, the true purpose of said swords was to bludgeon the
opponent senseless (much as a hammer would) and if you managed to hack thru
him, more power to you. Point and blade were not necessarily sharp as the
sharper you made it, the more brittle the metal became. And brittle is not
good against armor. It was not swinging the sword against armor that dulled
the blade. The blade was never sharpened to a razor edge. That would have
been silly, would look good, but would be worthless in the battlefield.

Most of the argument against the European blade is coming from people
stressing how useless they were against pikemen. Most of that is due to the
singular stupidity of the knights who charged pikemen and the people who
commanded them to. The simple fact of the matter is this: against an
armored opponent (not 100 pikemen and armored opponent) the European sword
will produce far more effective results than a katana would (though if you
throw in the pikemen, I'd rather have armor than be carrying a katana and
wearing normal clothes... assuming I would be foolish enough to charge them
in the first place). Against an unarmored opponent (armor meaning full
medieval plate, because I know someone will take this as ballistic cloth if
I don't explain it) a katana will be infinitely more effective (unless that
unarmored opponent had 100 pikemen helping him, which is the argument I've
seen produced against European blades... seems kinda funny, huh?). Each
weapon has its purpose. Each fulfills it's role.

Another part of the argument that is often missed is that it takes skill
(mainly) to fight with a katana and stamina (mainly) to fight with a heavy
broadsword. There are of course many other factors, but in Japan whoever
was the more skilled most often won and in Europe whoever was the most
durable won. What this all means is (drum roll) we're talking about two
completely different weapons used in two completely different manners by two
completely different civilizations. What applies to one does not apply to
another for the simple reason that they are so incredibly different.

One note on Paul J. Adam's comment (I think it was him...) about the Cold
Steel Tanto being able to punch through a car door and still have a perfect
tip. You're right. It can. But it isn't made in any way similar to the
making of a katana by a master swordsmith. Also, it is far more compact
than a katana. Force is distributed in a more linear fashion as the blade
hardly curves at all. Much easier to poke a hole in something with a
straight pin than a bent one when you push straight on. Is the Cold Steel
process better than a master swordsmith's? Nope, just different.

I would like to add this: if anyone does happen to know of a documentary
where it is shown that a katana can slice through a gun barrel, please
direct me to it. Now what this means is I want to see someone holding a
gun, someone swinging a sword at it, and the barrel being sliced clean away.
This would impress me greatly. What I do not want to see is some 100-year
old shell shocked basket case mumbling words that could maybe be construed
to that effect. I also do not want to see a braced piece of metal sliced.
It is far easier to do that than to slice a held weapon, which is what was
brought up, correct? A braced piece could be cut by many lesser means. I
want to be impressed.


-- TopCat
Message no. 29
From: Justin Elliott <justin.elliott@*******.OTAGO.AC.NZ>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 13:23:31 +1200
As has been pointed out by others, both types of swords were created by
different methods, to be used in different ways under totaly different
tactical situations. ( by the way European Swords is rarther a generic
term, there are MANY different types of European sword, even if you confine
the time period to talking about Knights!).

I think the question that needs to be answered is: should a Katana have
better/worse/the same ratings (in game terms) to the generic sword?
Message no. 30
From: Menard Steve <menars@***.UMONTREAL.CA>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 21:48:23 -0400
On Tue, 4 Jul 1995, Justin Elliott wrote:

What are we talking about here? Qualities of swords? yes. Based on
what? They way they were made hundreds of years ago! Now, correct me if
I'm wrong, but your average Katana(yes AVERAGE, meaning not from master
Whoever, swordsmith incorporated) is not gonna be better built than your
average sword. Not talking about today, not talking about the past,
talking about the future! Now, if you want to make a "true" katana in SR
term, give it increased damage or whatever based on the quality of the
sword, not on the type itself. Then, European sword could be higher
quality weapons too!

Now lets back up a little to re-discover the original question : What,
in SR terms, qualify the Katana for that higher damage. Potential
contestants : quality, way its used, number of hands used. Now, I've
already discarded the quality of the blade, and SR does not take into
account the way a weapon is used(a guy with 6 Armed Combat uses a Katana
OR a Sword at 6, so same skill). That leaves the number of hands used.
Katana : 2. Sword(as described in SR) 1. So there it goes, for average
weapons, used with the same skill, the difference in damaga is caused by
the difference of muscle mass behind the strike!

Don't get me wrong, I liked thatt thread(I am a medieval history fan),
and would like to gon on talking about it, but I think it is no longer
appropriate to SR. So, to answer your question, I'd make the katana make
the same damage as a Sword if used one-handedly and a sword to the Katana
damage if used 2-handedly.

Forget my outburst, but I had to get it out.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- |\_/| Still The One and Only Wolfbane! ---
--- |o o| " Hey! Why ya lookin' at me so weird? Ain't ya 'ver seen a ---
--- \ / decker witha horn ?" --- Scy, Troll decker with a CC ---
--- 0 Steve Menard menars@***.UMontreal.Ca ---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 31
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 01:35:57 GMT
> Paul> Cold Steel are a US knife manufacturer who produce excellent
> Paul> blades. One of their products is a copy of the Japanese tanto,
> Paul> which they make various claims for.
>
> Be warned. Most of these manufacturers are just that, manufacturers, not
> craftsmen. Their blades may be Rockwell 440 steel, which is damn fine
> steel, but they're stamped out by a machine with a die. Often they're
> just solid steel, occasionally you can find something that's been folded
> once or twice.

The Japanese composite-steel approach has some drawbacks (delamination
under impact being one) and can be copied by, for instance, low-alloy
bainitic steel without the time or expense. It's akin to saying James
Watt built the ultimate power engine and everything since is a pale
imitation :-) The Japanese workmanship still has advantages and is
far more beautiful, though.

> In other words, they're K-Mart brand blades, and they're likely to chip
> or break under heavy use.

Do not let Cold Steel's lawyers hear you saying that... I think they have
things like lifetime guarantees on many of their blades. Don't overlook
the effects of five centuries of metallurgic research. There is far more to
making a decent knife than stamping out a blank and grinding an edge. My
gen-u-ine imitation K-Bar is a cheap 440C stainless blade, and it survived
two years hard use (everything from opening ammo crates to probing for
mines) without visible damage.

If you take the time to properly forge that blank, rough grind it, process
anneal and then correctly heat treat it - after selecting the correct
grade of steel - you'll have a blade that leaves a four-hundred-year-old
tanto cold. You'll also be paying a sum in the middle hundreds of dollars
if you want to buy it.

Chris Reeve demonstrated his knives by cutting an oil drum into slices: the
point and edge were undamaged afterwards. I think you're a little hard on
modern technology.

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 32
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 02:09:17 GMT
> One note on Paul J. Adam's comment (I think it was him...) about the Cold
> Steel Tanto being able to punch through a car door and still have a perfect
> tip. You're right. It can. But it isn't made in any way similar to the
> making of a katana by a master swordsmith. Also, it is far more compact
> than a katana. Force is distributed in a more linear fashion as the blade
> hardly curves at all. Much easier to poke a hole in something with a
> straight pin than a bent one when you push straight on. Is the Cold Steel
> process better than a master swordsmith's? Nope, just different.

Never said it was the same... :-) I cited it as an example of the fact that
blades can withstand abuse if designed to do so.

The other point is a short blade is easier to punch through armour than a
long one: Euler rules. The longer the blade, the more likely it is to
buckle.

My point, which I also stated elsewhere, is that the magnificent metallurgy
of fine Japanese blades can be mimicked much more easily and cheaply by
other means. Consider carefully the endless quest to reduce the weight
of aircraft: if Japanese swordblades had some mystic metallic quality of
stiffness and strength and toughness that was unattainable elsewhere, every
smithy would ring with the noise of men folding and beating F-15 wing spars.

With correct steel selection, hot and cold working, heat treatment and surface
treatments, you could make a blade better than any katana without that
hard-to-produce, labour-intensive laminar structure today. But even forty years
ago I doubt that would be true.

Quite an achievement, to lead metallurgy for four hundred years...

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 33
From: Martin Steffens <BDI05626@***.RHIJ.NL>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 11:43:23 +0100
TopCat wrote:

> [snipped about "documentaries" where katanas sliced gun barrels]
>
> I have watched quite a few documentaries on WWII. You might say it was a
> passion of mine for a while. But one thing that I never saw was a katana
> slice a gun barrel. Sorry to burst that particular bubble, but I honestly
> don't feel such a documentary exists.

It exist, I saw it, just don't assume something doesn't exist if you
didn't see it. The documentairy was a Japanse propaganda film (I
think) in which they chopped the barrel of a .50 in two pieces with a
katana. Mind, to my knowledge it was a propaganda film and nothing
would have stopped them pre-cutting the barrel with a hack-saw :)

Greetings,



Martin Steffens
GeekCode v2.1
GO/SS d--(++) H- s+:+ !g p? !au a?(26) w+ v++(?) C+(++) P? E? !N>+
K- W+ M- !V -po+ Y+ t+@ !5>++ jx R++>+++ G''' tv+ b+++$ (sort
of) D++ B? e+$ (hah) u-(++) h f+ r n--- y+
Message no. 34
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 11:57:43 +0200
>Gurth> Give a katana armor-piercing qualities (i.e. half Impact or
>Gurth> something) against soft armors, and other swords not.
>
>You should include a requirement that there be some training in actually
>using the sword correctly.

Like, demand that the player takes Armed Combat (Edged Weapons, Katana)
skill? That sounds sort of OK, though maybe that's a bit too much. But then,
just regular Armed Combat might be too loose...


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Coming up after the break: more of the same nonsense!
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 35
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European swords
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 11:58:01 +0200
>> Gurth> Give a katana armor-piercing qualities (i.e. half Impact or
>> Gurth> something) against soft armors, and other swords not.
>
> The sword *already* has better impact armor reducing
>capabilities. That's probably why it has a higher power level, neh.
>Look at the freakin' game mechanics before y'all start changing things
>around too much.

Yeah well, there is a difference. A katana currently is (str+3)M against
both armored and unarmored targets. However, if you reduce the armor used
against it, an unarmored opponent will suffer just as much as normal, while
an armored one will suffer more. Also note I said "against soft armors" --
GM's decision as to what exactly is a soft armor, but security armors would
definitely be out :)


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Coming up after the break: more of the same nonsense!
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 36
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 18:20:21 -0400
>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Jonathan Adam
<Paul@********.demon.co.uk> writes:

>> In other words, they're K-Mart brand blades, and they're likely to chip
>> or break under heavy use.

Paul> Do not let Cold Steel's lawyers hear you saying that... I think
Paul> they have things like lifetime guarantees on many of their blades.

Okay, maybe they're something of an exception, then. There *are* a lot
of companies out there selling really cheap weapons, little better than
display replicas, for lots of money. Caveat emptor.

Paul> Don't overlook the effects of five centuries of metallurgic
Paul> research. There is far more to making a decent knife than stamping
Paul> out a blank and grinding an edge.

Agreed. BTW, a huge percentage of WWII-era "katanas" are just that, a
stamped blank with an edge ground on it.

Paul> My gen-u-ine imitation K-Bar

Is that anything like "genuine simulated human-hide covers" for your
copy of the Necronomicon? :)

[...]

Paul> Chris Reeve demonstrated his knives by cutting an oil drum into
Paul> slices: the point and edge were undamaged afterwards. I think
Paul> you're a little hard on modern technology.

No, just hard on the worthless stuff.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> \ Happy Fun Ball may stick to certain types
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! \ of skin.
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox/ \
Message no. 37
From: P Ward <P.Ward@**.CF.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 12:44:40 BST
the rat wrote :-

> Agreed. BTW, a huge percentage of WWII-era "katanas" are just that, a
> stamped blank with an edge ground on it.

I'm not surprised, this is back when the Japanese high command (or
whatever the correct term is? ) managed to convince all their
Kamikaze pilots that they were samurai, and so their death in
combat was the highest honour.... I expect they did have sort of
a rush for katana's that they needed to meet cheaply...

Phil (Renegade)
Message no. 38
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Katanas vs. European Swords
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 09:47:46 -0400
BTW, since we're on the topic of World War II, I'd like to dispell
another myth, about katanas slicing through gun barrels.

Well, it rarely happened. Originally US troops were taught to use their
rifles to block swordstrokes. This was later changed. Not because it
didn't work, but because the impact would deform the barrel. The next
round fired would wedge in the barrel and if another round was fired it
was likely that the weapon would blow up in the soldier's face.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> \ Happy Fun Ball may stick to certain types
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! \ of skin.
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox/ \
Message no. 39
From: Martin Steffens <BDI05626@***.RHIJ.NL>
Subject: katana's vs European swords
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 18:18:50 +0100
The Stainless Steel Rat wrote:

> You should include a requirement that there be some training
in actually
> using the sword correctly.

If you require special training for the katana, you have to
require that for a lot of weapons.
IMHO the katana is not so difficult to use; it's relatively
light weapon with a centre of gravity close to the hilt, the
hilt allows one and two handed use which gives more freedom of
movement and the weapon just feels great.

I tried a couple of H-t-H weapons, but I think the katana is
one of the easier ones to get to grips with quickly. Now the
large ones like the German 2H-swords (or the claymore) they
are impossible to wield without proper training: quick overba-
lancing, centre of gravity far to close to the point of the
weapon and the thing is to long! (and I'm not exactly small
nor weak). Or take flails, or the monowhip, or...etc.

Hope the point I'm trying to make is somewhat clear.

Greetings,

Martin

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Katanas vs. European Swords, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!