Is there an "offical" Samurai Space Marine chapter?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Alexi**

Plate armor may also weight in at 50 or 60 pounds...now add in the 25-40 pounds of chain to protect the areas that plate had to articulate around, the arming doublet to keep the chain from biting skin the chain coif and the cloth hood and then the plate helm....100+ pounds easy. Yes you trained as you would fight, in the plate. However, its still alot of metal. ALOT

**Lemartes12**

Exergy wrote:
Sparks_Havelock wrote:

As for the swords - European blades are stronger than Japanese blades. Don't fall for the popular media hype surrounding the katana - Japan rather successfully exported it's culture and America, along with popular media, lapped it up like mad. The katana is a mediocre sword; good for cutting against unguarded flesh but otherwise useless. c15/c16 katana were often mass produced weapons with fat, heavy blades, poor balance points and issued as a basic hand weapon for troops. In Europe those sorts of weapons were called 'munition arms'. You'd never get a katana to break apart a half-decent quality maille hauberk or haubergeon.

European weapons were light, well-forged and made from good quality resources, that were in great abundance*, shaped and altered by the weapons, armour & martial arts they faced. Such is the larger scale of Europe there were a great many different cultures, each with their own forms of weapons and armour, tactics & martial arts. This massive melting pot led to the incredible well made weapons of the 15th & 16th centuries. These weapons were the culmination of thousands of years of conflict, of hundreds of years of quench-hardening iron, of smiths honing their techniques as they passed them down to their apprentices and so on. If there is one downside to them, though, they're not as pretty as pattern-welded blades of c7-c10. Now those are -gorgeous- weapons.

As a literal demonstration of the strength of a langes schwert compared to a katana;

The katana was good in the context where it was employed, as a secondary weapon & as a cutting weapon against unguarded flesh.

Looking at the video, gotta say it is crap. The tomato cutting scene you can clearly see more juice/water coming out from the broad sword indicating the cut is not as clean and the blade not as sharp.

As for the breaking and bending, the static sword is fixed to a static backing. If it wasnt fixed it is very likely both would bounce and bend violently but not in that way. It also really depends on where there sword strikes.

In any event the broadsword is heavier so we should expect it to win. Being heavier it will be slower.

In any event I do agree that Japanese arms and armor are excessively stylized and hyped. The emphasis on cutting led to short decisive battle that while romantic isn't tactically the most effective.

Japan and Korea has effective archers, so armor was primarily to keep yourself from getting shot to death. England for a while had effective archers as well, and they proved to be effective against the French knights. The rest of europe did not have enough effective archers. They had plenty of ineffective archers, but very few effective ones. An effective archer required a dozen years of training and once killed could not easily be replaced. A samurai is basically an archer killer, light enough to quickly close the distance, armored enough to stand some chance against the archer, and with a deadly enough cutting weapon to kill all of the archers when/if he closes the distance. Knights on the other hand were poor at this task, either not having enough armor to stop arrows or being to heavy to give proper chase. Their weapons, while better at breaking heavy armor and defending themselves would not allow you to kill archers as fast as a samurai.

Of note, China did not have many effective archers either. In china, there were curved swords that resembled samurai swords, but they were for lower class peasant warriors and cavalry. A skilled warrior used a heavy straight blade, as with that he could parry, and more effectively break through the armor of his opponent.

Finally 15-16th century the age of knights in Europe was ending. Pikemen with integrated sword/halberd and missile troops were winning the day.
Asia never utilized the stirrup to truely take advantage of mounted warfare to break massed infantry.
You really cannot compare the Japan and Germany directly.

Realize that many europeans are also bigger and stronger than the average japanese person. The Katana maybe lighter and therefore faster. But it would be even faster in the hands of the average European (with proper training on how to use the weapon correctly).

**Exergy**

Grey Templar wrote:

Also, Longbows weren't all that effective at penetrating armor, but they did well through insane volume of fire. As well as killing the horses out from under their riders. You fire enough arrows at something you will eventually hit the weak spots. Crossbows were far better at penetrating armor individually, but took longer to reload and had a shorter range.

Crossbows were the primary ranged force of any army because of ease of training. A few hours practice would make you adequate enough for battle.

A longbow or recurve bow would have a draw weight of 100-140lbs easily enough to penetrate armor. A light crossbow(one that did not require a crank) would only have 50-70lbs of force. A heavy crossbow(with crank) could and would have a draw weight of 150+ lbs but could only be fired VERY slowly.

Crossbows were used in societies that did not have well trained archers because as you said you could train them very easily. But unless you had pikes or fortifications to slow down the enemy they werent terribly effective. While a heavy crossbow might have had slightly more penetrating power a regular bow in a trained archers hand would easily make up for it by having 10 times the ROF.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lemartes12 wrote:

Realize that many europeans are also bigger and stronger than the average japanese person. The Katana maybe lighter and therefore faster. But it would be even faster in the hands of the average European (with proper training on how to use the weapon correctly).

and many japanese people are bigger and stronger than average europeans. Are italinas known for being giants? medevil man was smaller than modern man. Even if the average are slightly different. I doubt it has much bearing on which weapons they chose to make.

Also as size goes up, speed goes down. So a taller european would be slower than a shorter european. A broad sword being much heavier and much longer would make is much slower, regarless of training than a shorter lighter sword. In the hands of a massively powerful person it might gain some speed, but it will never be as fast as a much smaller weapon.

**Sparks_Havelock**

I sat down this morning, with a nice hot cup of tea and wrote out a long reply to the various points raised by people in this thread. I beavered away for quite some time until, satisfied I had answered to the best of my ability I closed down the tabs on my browser of various posts I'd quoted. In my idiocy I closed the tab I'd written the post in. I threw my arms up into the air anger (along with tea from the mug I was holding - foolish mistake as warm tea for a comfortable shower does not make. Plus it's a pain having to dry out the keyboard) and howled my frustration at the ceiling. I'm dashed if I'll write it out all over again so all I'll say is that I suggest we leave this off-shoot of the topic be for now. It's been argued back and forth for years across the internet and we'll just be wasting our time discussing it further (in my opinion). I apologise for my vitriolic response that caused it and took the topic entirely away from the OP.

**Spetulhu**

Another misconception about swords that seems to be very common is blocking/parrying with them. They're sharpened metal pieces - if you slam two such together in the favorite edge-on-edge block from the movies damage will happen. Trying to use the side or back of the blade is not a much better idea as the blade can still be damaged.

Sure, olympic fencers hit their weapons together. But they're made for that style and don't really try to kill each other, only score hits. Back in the days when people did that with long (and crappy quality) rapiers they'd often have to stop a duel to go straighten out the blades.

tldr: Most or all "real" sword styles will go to great lengths to never ever put the blade in the path of an incoming attack. Risking your weapon when you can dodge or back off is bad. Sometimes you have to, but it's to be avoided if possible.

**Grey Templar**

Alexi wrote:
Plate armor may also weight in at 50 or 60 pounds...now add in the 25-40 pounds of chain to protect the areas that plate had to articulate around, the arming doublet to keep the chain from biting skin the chain coif and the cloth hood and then the plate helm....100+ pounds easy. Yes you trained as you would fight, in the plate. However, its still alot of metal. ALOT

For someone who has trained in that armor, no its not a lot of weight.

Its evenly distributed over the body.

And full plate suits didn't have tons of chainmail underneath. They were completely made of articulated plates. You would have almost the entire range of movement available to you as you would without the armor on. In fact, plate armor would give you better freedom of movement than chainmail would.

Armor was very well designed precisely so it wouldn't hinder the wearer, and they were quite successful at that.

**Spetulhu**

Grey Templar wrote:
And full plate suits didn't have tons of chainmail underneath. They were completely made of articulated plates.

Especially the full gothic suits (and later Maximilian style) were incredible works of art and functionality. So you needed to be Emperor Maximilian I, a king or very rich noble to afford the best stuff. But those really were easy to move in, and had a very good range of motion. I recall seeing a picture of the shoulder blades on one, individual sliding pieces riveted together so that raising the arm never left any place to try getting through. People can throw cartwheels in those if needed.

**livanbard**

The Katana discussion was nice. Crap iron explains why spears and bows were Japanese main weapons.

People need to let go of the myth that Samurai fought better than other warriors classes and used swords for the main weapons.

**sing your life**

I thought the Mantis warriors were supposed to be japenese SM.

**Bobthehero**

Sparks_Havelock wrote:
Isnip

not quite sure if I want to sacrifice my firstborn to you or hug you, but yeah, that post is perfect.

**skraaal**

2x210 wrote:
Like the GW has reference I mean it seems pretty self explanatory, we nerds like 40k, we nerds also tend to like samurais.. I'm gonna assume those two things cross over alot (and the plethora of Samurai Custom Space Marines on the net confirms this), so is their a Chapter that GW has written about that is based off the Samurai Culture, since we have Knights, Vikings, Mongols, Greeks etc.

I thought maybe the Red Scorpions but upon further inspection I think I am wrong.

Run a White Scars chapter, the Khan is a nice Mongolian theme, bikers for cavalry.

**usernamesareannoying**

idk if there is an official marine samurai theme but this is what it should look like...
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/544676.page

**purplefood**

sing your life wrote:
I thought the Mantis warriors were supposed to be japenese SM.

I don't think so.
They don't really have a theme barring 'We actually use camouflage' though that might have changed.

**Exergy**

Grey Templar wrote:
Alexi wrote:
Plate armor may also weight in at 50 or 60 pounds...now add in the 25-40 pounds of chain to protect the areas that plate had to articulate around, the arming doublet to keep the chain from biting skin the chain coif and the cloth hood and then the plate helm....100+ pounds easy. Yes you trained as you would fight, in the plate. However, its still alot of metal. ALOT

For someone who has trained in that armor, no its not a lot of weight.

Its evenly distributed over the body.

Armor was very well designed precisely so it wouldn't hinder the wearer, and they were quite successful at that.

Regardless of how it was designed, how many joints it had, or how perfectly it was tailored if it weighed 100lbs it weighed 100lbs. Tailoring does not alter the laws of physics. If it weighed anything it would slow them down and tire them out eventually.

Imagine a fit warrior, now imagine that warrior with 100lbs of fat. Fat is perfectly distributed across ones body. You can learn to fight with your fat. Now, Which one would be faster? Which one would have more endurance? The fit warrior, because he has less weight to carry. A 200lb fit guy will have more agility, change direction faster and tire less easily, because every time he moves he is using 33% less energy. Force, from muscles, is constant, and thus the acceleration of his movements would also be 33% faster.

**Durandal**

There are a multitude of videos showing that plate armor really isn't that restrictive.

Japanese steel is poor compared to European steel. Likewise the europeans had an equal martial tradition. However, Japan kept themselves isolated whereas the west advanced technologically to projectile weapons, making swords and armor obsolete and likewise the martial traditions of those degraded as well.
Ulfbert swords had a much higher carbon content then a Katana in the 800s, 400 years prior to the rise of the Samurai.

**Grey Templar**

Yup, Cultural Isolationism led to technological stagnation. They had basically advanced to a point where they couldn't advance any more without outside influence.

European steel work was a combination of native european technology and techniques along with Middle Eastern learning on the subject. The smiths of Toledo in Spain STILL make the best quality swords ever made, in terms of both design and material. A Toledo made sword was a fully functional work of art, you can still buy them today AFAIK. You want the most perfect swords ever, go to Toledo. Thousands of years of smithing advances culminate there.

**Spetulhu**

Grey Templar wrote:
Yup, Cultural Isolationism led to technological stagnation. They had basically advanced to a point where they couldn't advance any more without outside influence.

As I recall some Japanese (with enough money) even started buying European armor, those nice Spanish Conquistador breastplates to be specific. Bulletproof and all.

edit: though ofc some of it was for fashion and to show their wealth.

**Kid_Kyoto**

Jehan-reznor wrote:

That's me, they are more ancient warrior monks inspired, but i have a few samurai's in my kitty army BEHOLD!

Spoiler:

this is the most wonderful thing that was ever wonderful ever.

**Orlanth**

ImotekhTheStormlord wrote:
jareddm wrote:
The Emperor's Shadows are the official samurai chapter

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Emperor's_Shadows

This.

I very much doubt this is official, its a staff members homebrew, GW sometimes adds galleries of those.
The chapter 'exists' only in a painting guide for homebrew chapters, not in any piece of game fluff. Though as GW has published the images some excuse to consider the chapter canon exists.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey Templar wrote:
Yup, Cultural Isolationism led to technological stagnation. They had basically advanced to a point where they couldn't advance any more without outside influence.

European steel work was a combination of native european technology and techniques along with Middle Eastern learning on the subject. The smiths of Toledo in Spain STILL make the best quality swords ever made, in terms of both design and material. A Toledo made sword was a fully functional work of art, you can still buy them today AFAIK. You want the most perfect swords ever, go to Toledo. Thousands of years of smithing advances culminate there.

Traditonally there are two sword making centres Toledo is one, Damascus the other. Damascus steel is a match for Toledo steel.
This of course predelates local materials, as we can noty only import carbon rich iron, but also take ordinary iron and enrich it for modern swords you can match Toledo steel from any sufficiently skilled weaponsmith.

**Psienesis**

Actually, I believe the smiths of Toledo were importing not only the steel found in Damascus, but their smithing and smelting practices, given the Moorish influence (and occupation) of Spain until the 15th century.

**DaddyWarcrimes**

purplefood wrote:
sing your life wrote:
I thought the Mantis warriors were supposed to be japenese SM.

I don't think so.
They don't really have a theme barring 'We actually use camouflage' though that might have changed.

The Badab War stuff from FW greatly fleshed out the Mantis Warriors, making them into something samurai inspired.

**Durandal**

They tend to appear more like ninja or warrior monks, specializing in ambush, hit and run and misdirection. They rely heavily on myth and secrecy, are independent and mistrustful of outsiders.

I would think a samurai based chapter would be more like the black templar rules wise. Close combat, high regards for honor and specific rules of war.