Be a Supporter!

Katana in the Apocalypse? Why?

  • 31 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
  • Member since: Jun. 30, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Level 13
Blank Slate
Response to Katana in the Apocalypse? Why? 2012-05-09 21:05:47 Reply

At 5/9/12 08:02 PM, Kanon wrote: The armor types that katanas were put up against were made of small fibers usually from either bamboo or Leather, Sure a heavy edged sword could cleave through easily, but compared to their blades, lightweight armor, and intense training and meditation, Before you got anywhere close to a samurai, you'd be dead before you could raise your blade. Not to mention with the training of bushido, you learn the blade is just as useful as your own arm, it gets injured you take care of it.

No, samurai used a variety of armor. This is recorded history. Depending on the time period they could be wearing chainmail, metal plate, laminar, lamillar, scale etc.

Oh, and they didn't use swords as primary weapons. The sword didn't get it's "spiritual" recognition until the Edo Period. There are recorded duals before then that involved the use of bows.

Not unarmored flesh. if katana steel hits against bones a couple times, it will chip, easily. the "swords that are bashed against hard steel plate armour" are low carbon, which makes the metal more flexible, because there's less carbon to bind everything together. They don't have as sharp of an edge, but are more durable. those are classical longswords and western-style swords.

Western swords were NOT low carbon. No sword is designed to be bashed against plate armor, period. There are better weapons for the jobs. Swords that did encounter plate armor were designed to thrust through gaps. A steel plate cannot be hacked through with a melee weapon, but it can be crushed with blunt weapons and occasionally pierced.

The primary weapons of the battlefield samurai were the bow, club, and spear, and naginata, not the sword. The primary weapons of the knight were the mace, warhammer, lance, spear, and axe.

Also remember that even when plate armor was developed, only the richest of knights or high ranking soldiers could afford a full, up-to-date plate suit. It became a common site on the battle but not common to wear.

Katanas are completely different, they have a high carbon construct from the "damascus forging" (which doesn't exist anymore) and thus have a very sharp edge, but are not as flexible as the other blades. Samurais carried MULTIPLE swords with them specifically for that reason, so they wouldn't be fucked in combat if their weapon broke.

Good God, do some research. "Damasus" is not what traditional Japanese steel is called. Traditional smithing was NEVER lost. That's a common myth. You're just propagating common myths. It ceased for about five years after the end of World War II and then resumed afterwords.

They carried two swords (which by the way was only popular during the Edo Period) because the shorter was more convenient for indoor fighting and street fighting, the long sword was for open field use.

the smallest blade, was the only weapon to never see action, not even to cut anothers throat, but to end said holders life if they took the honorable way out.

Not even close.

  • Member since: Nov. 26, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Level 15
Response to Katana in the Apocalypse? Why? 2012-05-09 21:08:01 Reply

This is why I bought a cold steel magnum kukri machete. It's cheap, sharp enough to cut off arms, and I can sharpen it easily. Perfect for CQC because if I can't swing the 17 in blade then I can use the pointy end.

Sig by BabiesAteMyDingo

BBS Signature