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.

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Alby's right that a good thrust to a vital area is much more likely to kill or incapacitate. It does require more physical commitment to the motion; slashing, OTOH, is something you can do while moving more defensively and exposing yourself less. Nevertheless, the RM have the right approach- you don't want to draw out a knife fight and risk getting badly cut yourself. In combat you want it to be over quickly- overbear and control the guy and stick the knife somewhere it'll finish the fight.

I'm more of a defensive swordsmen . I like drawing out fights so it might just be personal preference.

But yeah I get the stabbing thing. I feel a quick slash to stomach would usually put someone and kill them quite well. (Not saying i have, . Just a thought).

We're talking about two different things. Speaking as someone trained as a Fencer, you should never confuse Fencing with attempting to kill someone or win a fight with a knife. In Fencing I trained (and if you Fence, then you train) in a sport evolved from and/or emulating historical sword fighting techniques. We are not training to do what the Royal marines do, which is kill someone as quickly and expediently as possible in an actual life or death situation. You never want to draw out a fight in real life. You want it to be over. Either by escape or by incapacitating the other guy.

Of course I did use a broad sword and held it in an undergrip for some strange reason. I have no idea why i hold swords backwards. Might be my defensiveness showing.

Or possibly you're just making stuff up, as no broadsword teacher is going to tell you that holding it underhand is a good idea, nor will anyone who's actually trained as a Fencer be inclined to hold any sort of long blade underhanded.

Most likely not. Just saying, due to personal preference, i prefer slashing, because it is more natural for my defensive stance that I have.

Though I'm just saying from a look it would be better to stab and get out. And i haven't been trained to kill just to know how to use a sword, as a sport.

The same reason why i have a better way of using my under hand toss is far more accurate and my underhand sword strike is faster than my overhand strike, not arguing anything about stabbing, I've been convinced looked it up. Saw I was wrong just seemed from my point of view as a defensive fighter, slashing seemed better.

Though I haven't fenced since I was 16. Didn't catch my attention, nor was i a fanastic swordsmen. More in physical body movements. Tricking and natural movement.

I am also not getting them confused.

 Flashman wrote:
Having watched the 2nd video, it seems to be most useful if you happen to tackled by someone wielding two samurai swords.

No doubt this is an everyday occurrence in the US, but it's decidedly more rare over here.

Thats more common in Australia. Surely you remember the guy that got into a chainsaw fight with a samurai sword .

Okay, cool. Having mostly done Fencing and LARP swordplay, my own natural inclination is defensive as well. Slash, stay back, and don't get hit.

I am very careful not to confuse that with actual real world combat techniques, though. When I trained actual defense against a knife in Aikido, the idea was to get a hold of the guy's arm, lock and pin him as quickly as possible. Not to dance around.

 Mannahnin wrote:

Or possibly you're just making stuff up, as no broadsword teacher is going to tell you that holding it underhand is a good idea, nor will anyone who's actually trained as a Fencer be inclined to hold any sort of long blade underhanded.

This, a thousand time this. Why would you ever, ever willingly lenghten the distance between your weapon and your opponent. In a fistfight, you put your hands up in between you and your adversary, not behind your back.

And anyone who has taken fencing lessons and then say that foils are for wuss have completely missed the point of the sport.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Okay, cool. Having mostly done Fencing and LARP swordplay, my own natural inclination is defensive as well. Slash, stay back, and don't get hit.

I am very careful not to confuse that with actual real world combat techniques, though. When I trained actual defense against a knife in Aikido, the idea was to get a hold of the guy's arm, lock and pin him as quickly as possible. Not to dance around.

Now the Italians form of sword fighting is deadly. Hence why (Unless i am getting them confused). Knife fighting sounds cool, liked to do it, but always cut my hand by accident first day, and quit a week later.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:

Or possibly you're just making stuff up, as no broadsword teacher is going to tell you that holding it underhand is a good idea, nor will anyone who's actually trained as a Fencer be inclined to hold any sort of long blade underhanded.

This, a thousand time this. Why would you ever, ever willingly lenghten the distance between your weapon and your opponent. In a fistfight, you put your hands up in between you and your adversary, not behind your back.

And anyone who has taken fencing lessons and then say that foils are for wuss have completely missed the point of the sport.

I don't know foils don't seem heavy to me nor are they inherently interesting (German-Aussie Mix O.o)

This, a thousand time this. Why would you ever, ever willingly lenghten the distance between your weapon and your opponent. In a fistfight, you put your hands up in between you and your adversary, not behind your back.

There are real martial techniques for knives which involve holding them underhanded. Not really for swords, mind you.

 Mannahnin wrote:
There are real martial techniques for knives which involve holding them underhanded. Not really for swords, mind you.

Ah. So I might of gotten techniques mixed up when i dueled with the broad sword. I actually found it a great way to back someone off. Though its horribly inefficient compared to a double handed approach.

Though BACK ON TOPIC

Electrified weapons no.

 Asherian Command wrote:

I don't know foils don't seem heavy to me nor are they inherently interesting (German-Aussie Mix O.o)

It's the style which puts the most emphasis on dexterity and speed. Big swords are just a way to compensate for something else


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mannahnin wrote:

There are real martial techniques for knives which involve holding them underhanded. Not really for swords, mind you.

Which would be logical, because you already start closer to your body than you would want to. I'd like to see the effectiveness of those techniques compared to a more direct approach, a la roman.

It might be a consequence of my years of kenpo, but directness, aggression and speed are usually what I've been formed to value in martial arts. The little I did of fencing (one semester in high school every year) seemed to indicate that it was also the best way to handle blades.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

I don't know foils don't seem heavy to me nor are they inherently interesting (German-Aussie Mix O.o)

It's the style which puts the most emphasis on dexterity and speed. Big swords are just a way to compensate for something else

Which I am lacking with my Australian descent. What can I say?

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Alby's right that a good thrust to a vital area is much more likely to kill or incapacitate. It does require more physical commitment to the motion; slashing, OTOH, is something you can do while moving more defensively and exposing yourself less. Nevertheless, the RM have the right approach- you don't want to draw out a knife fight and risk getting badly cut yourself. In combat you want it to be over quickly- overbear and control the guy and stick the knife somewhere it'll finish the fight.

I'm more of a defensive swordsmen . I like drawing out fights so it might just be personal preference.

But yeah I get the stabbing thing. I feel a quick slash to stomach would usually put someone and kill them quite well. (Not saying i have, . Just a thought).

We're talking about two different things. Speaking as someone trained as a Fencer, you should never confuse Fencing with attempting to kill someone or win a fight with a knife. In Fencing I trained (and if you Fence, then you train) in a sport evolved from and/or emulating historical sword fighting techniques. We are not training to do what the Royal marines do, which is kill someone as quickly and expediently as possible in an actual life or death situation. You never want to draw out a fight in real life. You want it to be over. Either by escape or by incapacitating the other guy.
.

This is an important point imho. The two points of a knife fight are 1. You will be cut. 2. you must incapacitate or kill your opponent as quickly as possible. You are aiming for deep organ cuts, major arteries, the throat, incapacitation points like the forehead which will bleed a lot and get in your opponent's eyes, damaging the hands to reduce fighting capacity, all while directing where and how you yourself are cut and ignoring that pain. I don't have stats for knife fights between master level martial artists, such things mostly faded before the modern era, but Eskrima death matches were legal well into the 1930s in places and on average lasted seconds for a total of two blows. Incapacitation, death blow. That quick. Thankfully removing a sentry is a lot simpler then engaging in a duel and a full on knife fight.

Edit: Of course for Japanese swordsmanship Iaido or their own sport fencing form of Kendo are good ways to learn. Do you research on the latter, and with ALL martial arts schools and ensure where ever you're learning has a good reputation and preferably is vetted by an international association dedicated to that sport. For Japanese arts you should be able to ask about and receive an extremely detailed explanation of the school's lineage.

Tokyo Joe martial arts schools of all flavors are everywhere. They will take your money and you won't learn much that will be useful to you, both as a martial artist and to enhance your personal ability to defend yourself should the need come.

An amusing way to illustrate how dead most people would be in a knife fight is to get some white t-shirts and packs of sharpies with your mates, try to simulate the damage you receive as best you can.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

I don't know foils don't seem heavy to me nor are they inherently interesting (German-Aussie Mix O.o)

It's the style which puts the most emphasis on dexterity and speed. Big swords are just a way to compensate for something else

The foil is the inheritor of the nobility's "small sword" which I dislike for a variety of reasons most focusing on it's complete lack of suitability for doing much besides serving as an over larger dinner knife, or a way to let noblemen compensate for not being able to heft a real sword. Even a rapier is much better by comparison, Cappoferro's school of rapier fencing is as close as I get to modern sport fencing. I do learn solo, not a large population for rapier out here and I don't have the time or finances presently for SCA. For those wishing to learn Rapier fencing I strongly suggest Guy Windsor's The Duellist;s Companion and for longswordsmen his The Swordman's Companion both are excellent translations of original source documents mixed with modern training regimes and are illustrated both with original plates from Cappoferro (in the case of the former) and photos demonstrating the contained techniques. If you want to learn knife fighting I suggest looking into the aforementioned Eskrima, there's a chance a master is near you, especially in California.

I think Tesla Blade would be a much cooler name.

And more correct.

A power sword destabilizes the matter it hits, making it easier to cut. This just adds an electric shock to the normal cutting force.

Yes, can we please get back to discussing sticking a vibroknife into somebody's belly instead. seriously, it does sound more like a vibroblade from Star Wars than a power sword from 40K. My two cents.

Doesn't a vibroblade, ya know, Vibrate?

 Grey Templar wrote:
Doesn't a vibroblade, ya know, Vibrate?

And wouldn't that just be a large turkey carver?

 Mr Nobody wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Doesn't a vibroblade, ya know, Vibrate?

And wouldn't that just be a large turkey carver?

mmmmmmyup!

Now that is how I would think you could get something like a chainsword. Not a literal chain weapon, but a pair of reciprocating blades.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Doesn't a vibroblade, ya know, Vibrate?

Ultrasonically. It's like make a knife out of a tuning fork, as soon as it hit something brittle like your head it'd shatter your skull.

 Ratbarf wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Doesn't a vibroblade, ya know, Vibrate?

Ultrasonically. It's like make a knife out of a tuning fork, as soon as it hit something brittle like your head it'd shatter your skull.

There are ultrsonic knives:



Quick...someone converts that into a weapon...STAT! (biggest challenge would probably be the portable powah supply).

Ever seen a tuning fork touch a tooth? Not pretty.

I want to see them build a taser into an assault rifle. Can you imagine hypersonic ammunition that pierces body armor and destroys the soft tissue underneath with overpressure AND tazes them, too? ZOMG!!!

The electrical shock would be far more useful on a telescoping baton. The extra 12 to 18" over a knife makes a world of a difference.

 Breotan wrote:
I want to see them build a taser into an assault rifle. Can you imagine hypersonic ammunition that pierces body armor and destroys the soft tissue underneath with overpressure AND tazes them, too? ZOMG!!!

They do make Taser ammunition for shotguns. the projectile is a self-contained taser.

I'd rather have the stun shield. Or the stun baton for that matter.

Combing an edged weapon with a non-leathal electircal deterrant weapon is confusing methodologies.