Ok, can anyone tell me if there was any noteworthy difference in design between the katanas produced in the 16th century and those of the 18th century?

Also, was the Tachi traditionally a 1 or 2 handed sword?

As for design up until the 15th century the blades are 70+ cm, but during the 15th & 16th century due to a growing need for close quarter fighting the blades were made shorter, around 60 cm, while later on going into the 17th century they went back to over 70+cm being the norm.

Tachi would vary, the calvary model was usually 1 handed, while some lords had massive ones over 3 meters long. Ironically tachi were sometimes chopped down to be made into katanas.

And this is why I hang out here. People KNOW things!

Do you honestly think we KNOW these things? Like, we've actually committed antique japanese blade length and design specs to memory?

No my friend, what we know is how to find information, how to research something. I guess you could say we have a fair number of points in Computer, decent Intuition scores, and no cap on our Extended Test time intervals.

~Umi

Data Search, Data Search, Data Search...Maybe Browse...

I know lots of these things, but that also has to do with me being a sword freak.... Well actually i know a good bit more about European swords but hey... As I recall the early Katanas were cavalry swords, and the armor piercing tip was implemented when they fought the Mongles in Korea. They needed something to pierce through several layers of hardened leather.

European swords? Well, I'm not exactly a sword nut, but I do like my European blades. I love the 18th century smallswords, as they tend to be works of art in addition to functional weapons.

Sword Freaks, Gun Nuts, and Veterans abound here. It's great!!!

BTW: Every Shadowrunner should have a Katana now, like in the 'trids!

I think the Schiavona is a more stylish weapon. Just saying.

So 2050's it's all about the faux Viking now - combat axes and horned helmets.

I'd usually opt for a gladius, myslef.

Dikoted, for preference.

I dunno, the Gladius has always seemed a little plain to me. I mean, I get function over aesthetic: If it works, who the hell cares what it looks like?
Personally though, I feel that if you're wielding a sword in the future then it's a matter of style. if not, you'd just be wielding a gun. Hence I like the possibly over-elaborate designs that cropped up when swords became the weapon of a gentleman and a status symbol, hence the European Smallswords.

Ah, but for close in nasty fighting where you might have to punch through some armor, that gladius is nasty sorts of handy.

Not sure the gladius was really designed to punch through armour, I always had it pegged for a more all-rounder of a blade. Then again, nothing at all wrong with a sword for all occasions.

Though I have to add that for close up no-holds-barred beatdowns the WW2 era knuckle-duster trench knives are freaking brutal.

If you're up against a fellow in armor in the 2050s-2070s, chances are his armor is very, very good at stopping ballistic impacts, and fairly good at resisting stabbity and slashing types of harm.

It's probably some kind of fancy armor-weave that wears like cloth, or form-fitting ballistic catsuit.


How well do you think it'll resist something like this?

Yknow, I'd recommend watching the documentary about viking swords (Netflix), interesting stuff. Ever since I've been all "pft, Katana, they used shitty steel that's why they needed to do all that folding and hammering" but an Ulfberht, that was pretty bad ass.

They have a serious thrusting point and a heavy spine for just that. You'd need to use some modern materials science to make it punch through armor, but then again ballistic fabrics have been terrible against knife points since Kevlar came about.

I do love my bludgeons. However, let's face it: There is only one weapon WORTHY of modern melee.

Or, you know, you could set them on fire. Synthetic clothing tends to go up like a torch.

Oh come on, I had to say that! I have a reputation for gratuitous overkill and burning stuff to maintain! You think this is easy?

I saw a documentary that said the curve formed by folding katana steel cut better that straight blades, especially through the kinds of things they needed to cut through during that era (leather, cloth, etc.). In fact, that beautiful shape cuts about optimally. What do you think?

Curve=larger cutting edge=higher tissue damage=less effective against armour.
Stabbing tip=small cutting edge=low tissue damage=high penetration.

Different weapons do different things well. That's why sword designs continued to evolve over the centuries. No one design beat all the others in every aspect.

That said, the two-handed monsters wielded by the Doppelsoldener would give any blade you care to name a run for their money. Those things were BAD ASS.

Interestingly, in the same documentary they showed, all those cool shots of a katana and its super edge cutting through rolled up tatami mats and stuff? Seems a well made european sword without a serious edge (you can run your hand over it), can do the same thing just as well.

http://www.thearma.org/Videos/Blunt_Bastar...rd_onBamboo.MOV

Most of the people I have talked to have said the difference is marginal at best.

Yeah but nothing gives that satisfying wet melon "pop" like a katar sliding through corpsec body armor.

It's mostly due to physics. The curve of the blade naturally causes the edge to cut, requiring less energy than forcing a wedge to cut (like a straight blade). In other words, the curve of the blade caused the blade to slice, whereas with a straighter blade you'd need a forward/backward motion as well.

As for tatami mats: you could feasibly move a high-tensile rod of titanium fast enough to cut one. The edge simply reduces the amount of speed required to get the desired result. Yes, you can cut with a dull blade. You can cut much more easily with a sharp one, however.

I'll stick with my toy phaser enchanted as a wand of manabolt or stunbolt depending on my mood

Cougar FineBlade looks nice to me, and has decent stats. Lacking that, a Kukri of a tolerable size is also a nice option. Both also work as Machetes.

See above about two-handed swords. those guys got double pay for a reason.

They were also double paid because their job was to charge spear walls and break them down.

As far as the side arming swords go they were practical for unarmored gentalmen against unarmored ruffians. I'm a fan of Sir George Silver's line of thought... don't listen to the italians and use the right sized weapon for your body. He also had an intresting line of thought about what weapons had avantages on others. He said single sword< Sword & Dagger < Bow Staff < Sword and shield < two handed sword < battle axe < Black Bill. The Black bill apparently had an advantage over every other weapon. I don't know much about Bills myself though.

a quick search shows that Bills are rather nasty. also come in a variety of lengths, many come in the size of a Halberd, some come shorter with a wider blade.

I likes me some forward curving blades like a kukri or falcata.

Yeah I'm partial to a falcata too.

"Katanas a better" (no tvtropes link here) is a bad cliche, who would have thought?

I have a personal fondness for Naginata IRL. I find it has a great deal of versatility with right training.

And this is why the internet is generally a lousy place to look up this information. Sword nut or not... you don't know what you're talking about here.

Katanas do not use a piercing tip. Thrusting with the blade is to be avoided if at all possible, especially against armor! Against an unarmored foe it can work, but pray it doesn't catch and flex against a bone. This is a great way to break the tip and see the blade cut down, repolished, and reworked into a shorter sword.

Thrusting is the single fastest way to snap a katana blade or ruin the cutting edge. The blade has a good deal of flex if made correctly and lacks the straight 'spine' to deliver the force along (like you'd find on gladius, or late period cut & thrust sword). The blade ends up flexing and cracking (if not breaking) the hardened cutting edge. Not just thrusting, but hitting anything hard with the end area of the katana while slashing can damage it.


Umidori:
Search only goes so far on the internet... you also need a good knowledgebase to know the 'hype' 'enthusiast' and the 'actual'.

See above.

Other posters:
The katanas strength is it's ability to 'fence' while slashing. Most other slashing weapons are designed to deal with heavier armor and suffer from a lack of agility in comparison but have more momentum when they hit. The curved blade is common to a lot of different slashing swords. (scimitars, cavalry sabres, etc.). It's because they're designed to slice... you swing the blade and draw it back at the same time making a nice clean cut just as if you were slicing a loaf of bread. (you don't chop bread you slice it). Hence the name draw cut. It's weakness is dealing with heavy armor (like say corp sec in milspec armor).

the confusion comes from people seeing many Samurai moves where they push forward into the enemy, These moves are not to pierce per se, they are more to push the opponent away while keeping yourself defended.

Really, any of the slashing blades are pretty much pointless against hard armor. It was the whole reason that the slashing sword fell out of use in the West (outside of light cavalry skirmishers designed to hit-and-run against lightly armored opponents) until the crossbow and black powder musket took plate armor off the battlefield and brought the cavalry sabre back into play.

Please explain to me why there are kenjutsu schools and styles that specialize in thrusting? Seriously man, I've noticed you tend to get on a high horse if you think you sense one thing wrong with a statement. I usually attribute that to personal weakness.

Perhaps because kenjutsu and kendo are not, in fact, real killing arts schools, but are primarily exercise and sport schools? Also, they tend to use bokken, not actual katana. Not only will a wooden bokken stand up to thrusting better than an actual katana, especially if you thrust it into something hard, but if it does fail to stand up, replacing it is vastly cheaper and the loss of it in the middle of a style demonstration or, at worst, a competition fight, is not likely to be lethal.

But hey, I'll just let you get back to slinging stones in glass houses.

That said, one can do a fair amount of harm with a bokken if properly applied, but yeah you have to remember this is an art to reflect the training in much the same way as fencing.

Strikes are only supposed to go on the armored parts and the perfect thrust is one that can tap you on the guarded neck (or over the heart in fencing). The skill comes in being able to show that you can make such controlled strikes, which is difficult.

I once hooked my foil on the teacher's mask as I had lunged, meanwhile he had lunged at the same time so I ended up going past him, and spun him like a fish on a line. Yeah, he wasn't right pleased...

Which is probably why I prefer blunt tools.

Well, sure. Miyamoto Mushashi made a habit of wrecking and killing people with boken, primarily because he was dirt-poor and couldn't afford to replace his actual sword if it got broken.

Why are there signs saying "ye olde", if that phrase was never used historically? Not saying it's the case here, but a lot of stuff that gets sold as historical arts in fact just historicizing, so that argument is shaky at best

Slide... since you didn't back up your schools with any links but blind assertions. The only things I could find online were 'Kendo' schools online teaching the thrusting technique and calling themselves 'kenjutsu'. As others above have pointed out a thrust to the neck is a score in kendo. But kendo has about as much to do with actual fighting as does sport fencing.

All the jutsu's are different than the 'do's. This is a relic of the post-war period. All jutsus were banned. (kenjutsu, killing art of the sword; kyujutsu, killing art of the bow; jujutsu, of the fist... etc. What was left intact was the far more ritualized religious/sport/competition forms of kendo, kyudo, and judo.


Furthermore, you completely missed the point. :)

You asserted that the katana had, I quote, "an armor piercing tip" to stab through mongol leather armor. Nothing could be farther from the truth! Mongol leather armor doesn't mean bomber or bikers jackets. It means boiled leather which is extremely stiff and hard. It's not an easy material to stab through.

It's one thing to stab at something soft and unprotected like an unarmored throat. Quite another to attack armor head on with the intent of punching through it.