Slick, elegant blades that can gently and swiftly take a man down without condemning the wielder to the low ranks of a barbarian for usage of one requires a skilled approach.

Instead of the stiff, log, heavy-metal swords the westerners used to maim the opponent. When those huge field-battles occured, western fighters used their swords to deal as much damage as they could to the other so he wouldn't be able to participate in the battle anymore. This resulted in thousands of warriors lying on the ground with gruesome wide-open wounds and eventually after some time die from infection, getting trampled over, gangreen or simply bleeding to death.

// I do tend to look at english battles here, not sure how the continent related to this... </font>[/QUOTE]To Answer Sythe: Because Eastern Weapons are typically highly overrated.
To Zuvio: Saying that Western Weapons were "Stiff, Log, Heavy metal swords" is not just an asinine statement, its racist and shows no respect or knowledge of western swordplay. </font>[/QUOTE]It has nothing to do with being racist. It has everything to do with opinions. If you disagree with Zuvio's opinion concerning European/Western swords, then that's it. No more arguments, you just disagree. </font>[/QUOTE]How is it not racist? It lumps all swords produced by the west (read: White Europe) as being "Stiff, Log, Heavy metal", while all blades from the east as requiring a "Skilled touch". </font>[/QUOTE]Therefore implying that westerners are bumbling brutes that hack and slash anything that moves with their "Stiff, Log, Heavy metal" what any old person could use without the need for skill, and Easterners are skillful with their weapons and not bumbling brutes.

--Kestrel--

<span style="color: lightblue">In what way?

<span style="color: lightblue">Then tell him of western swordplay. Teach him the western culture. Explain why western blades are as good as, or better than, eastern blades. Argue the point, and don't just throw words like "racist" around. Especially not when your own post could just as easily be interpreted as racism.

practicing santoryu or somthing? (three sword style?)

bloody good choice though ^^ </font>[/QUOTE]Suioryu actually. ;)

[ 01-02-2005, 09:17 PM: Message edited by: Kakero ]

Eastern weapon often fall prey to the "eastern is better" style of arguments. The Katana, as mentioned above, is a good sword for its purpose (a highly specialized one. The fact remains that a longsword is more versatile then a katan(thrusting, cutting) and likely is built of stronger material (higher quality steel).
Western style fencing is old, and dates back to the roman empire, as well as "barbarian influences" (The peoples). Please PM me for information of western style sword fighting history. Back on topic anyway, My choice for a sword is No Da Chi (eastern anti-horse sword).

[ 01-02-2005, 09:29 PM: Message edited by: Sir Degrader ]

And I just had to ask that question.... [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

Well, I gues I am a little late to answer, and realy late to give a comical answer since the discussion has gotten serious, but I have no respect. My weapon of choice?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Meat Cleaver

Thanks for the info, Spirits Forever. Now if I can just remember "zanbatou" for more than a week.... 'Twas my friend who was into kenshin, and at the time my Japanese was crap and his anime was straight out o' Japan with no subtitles, so the plot elements passed me by.

As for western vs. eastern argument, that's just too complicated to go into. Mainly I figure people either chose based on looks or what they knew. But really it's unfair if you can only choose one. Personally I'd love to have them all, from rapier to bastard sword to whatever odd knife I could get my greedy little paws on.

When concerning Western/Eastern debates, I tend to favor the East, yes. I am biased towards the traditional ways of Asia. Their culture appeals to me in more ways than the Western culture does.

However, I am a westerner, a pureblood from the old barbaric Germanian tribes. I have only seen my family weapon once (not even sure that that was it) and know very little about my family's past. I would gladly see it otherwise, but alas.

Now, and you've felt it coming the whole time: calling me a person who makes asinine/rasist remarks is way out of line. I don't know wether you said it in the heat of the moment or genuinly meant what you said, I don't care. It is simply unbefitting for a debater, for you did not show me my error in the first place. And unfortunately, it's a complete conversation stopper....

[ 01-03-2005, 06:17 AM: Message edited by: Zuvio ]

(Still dares someone to challenge the 2-d sword)

"Bring it on!!"

hah, that's an easy one to destroy, *picks up eraser*
"now where's that sword!"

Awww! Well, wait a minute, I said it was 2-d, I never said it was only drawn! (Or it's at least in pen!!) :D

And this was exactly why I posted, Sir Degrader. I don't mind you having an opinion and Zuvio having a different one, I just mind the way you were expressing it in. I hope you understand.

you know they have Erasable pens now days right ^^;

so your 2-d sword has met it's match! (thats another possibility BUrning it XD )

GRRRRR! Ok, fine, I will take my personal lightsaber, then. I would go into details, but I've geeked out enough already, today. ;)

^^;
pencil/pen/eraser!

lightsaber is a good choice too ^^

Tsk, tsk, tsk. How could you give up so easily? You should learn the sacred art of loopholes. For example, the 2d sword doesn't have to be drawn by erasable pen, also it is not confined to that medium. It could be a sword on a monitor for example.

Now, my counter argument is that the 2d sword is worthless because if it's edge is non existent. It only has width and length, no depth, which means an edge is impossible. And without an edge, it can not cut. If you attacked someone, nothing would get severed, since the sword would just pass harmlessly through. oh, and a flaw, even if this sword worked, and could slice anything, the entire sword would have to be 2d (if the handle was 3d, the blade would fall through it) and the handlewould cut through your hand. Plus the 2d sword could never be picked up, since that also requires an edge. So, although a good idea, the 2d sword is pointless. The idea on the other hand, is good. Make a sword that is as thin and sharp as possible (without being brittle) and kick butt with it, as long that it's not so thin that it's edge does not exhist.

The pen is mightier than the sword!!


--Kestrel--

I'd hate to say it, but Daystar really nailed the issue on the head.He however forgets the echelon plan, that is the complete destruction of all pens using an advanced polymer made sword, code named ECHELON. So I change my choice. Instead of my No Dachi, it's now the ECHELON blade.

I'll believe it when Shakespeare kicks the crap out of King Aurthor and Excalibur by poking him in the face. And I mean in real life, not in some story.

[ 01-05-2005, 06:32 PM: Message edited by: armageddon272 ]

Now that would be something to see, wouldnt it? Shakespeare and King Arthur in a dual to the death...

Maybe Jerry Bruckheimer could make a film about that?


--Kestrel--

[ 01-13-2005, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: Kestrel Daystar ]

Instead of Bruckheimer, why not a hyper violent anime with giant tentacled aliens and half hour long battle sequences that consists of hugely muscular men staring at each other and going "ehhhhhhhhh"?

I'll believe it when Shakespeare kicks the crap out of King Aurthor and Excalibur by poking him in the face. And I mean in real life, not in some story. </font>[/QUOTE]that's easy, i doubt shakespeare even has to use his pen,
he could go and sing or read his prose/poetry and Aurther would fall asleep and well then he could poke aurthor to death , that'd work now woudn't it [img]graemlins/showoff.gif[/img]

I'll believe it when Shakespeare kicks the crap out of King Aurthor and Excalibur by poking him in the face. And I mean in real life, not in some story. </font>[/QUOTE]that's easy, i doubt shakespeare even has to use his pen,
he could go and sing or read his prose/poetry and Aurther would fall asleep and well then he could poke aurthor to death , that'd work now woudn't it [img]graemlins/showoff.gif[/img] </font>[/QUOTE]Would that qualify as "Hitting below the belt"?

I'll believe it when Shakespeare kicks the crap out of King Aurthor and Excalibur by poking him in the face. And I mean in real life, not in some story. </font>[/QUOTE]that's easy, i doubt shakespeare even has to use his pen,
he could go and sing or read his prose/poetry and Aurther would fall asleep and well then he could poke aurthor to death , that'd work now woudn't it [img]graemlins/showoff.gif[/img] </font>[/QUOTE]Would that qualify as "Hitting below the belt"? </font>[/QUOTE]i guess [img]graemlins/lol.gif[/img]