yeah, (i'm not kakero) but it's called a zanbato,

WOW! uss, i'm impressed, someone'd dig up a knife from my country! i have a few, but really a wakazashi would be soo much better, ^^ </font>[/QUOTE]I remember! Sanosuke from Kenshin had a Zanbato he carries around. He's so wicked ;) </font>[/QUOTE]yup, that's where i know it from, sad thing it's only there for such a short time,.
and my likeness for wakazashi comes from kenshin as well, Aoshi, the coolest swordsman ^^

The Two-dimensional sword! Cuts through anything and everything, cause it's two-dimensional, duh! Atom splitting is going to be fun! :D

Spirits Forever, you're Nepalese? That's cool. [img]smile.gif[/img] My father loves Nepal, he's went there at least 4 times. In fact, when he last went there, he brought 8 Kukri knives with him. :eek:


Oh, regarding that Zanbatou, I did some searching and found some cool pics. Pretty nice looking, huh? :D


Rurouni Kenshin was a fun anime. It had so many cool characters - Kenshin, Sanosuke, Shishou, Aoshi, Seijuro, Saitoh, Soujiro, Amakusa, that mean looking bulky fist-fighting priest guy(forgot the name :D ) and probably some more - My favourites of which were Amakusa, Soujiro and Aoshi.

Wow! That cavalier killer looks a lot different from Sanosuke's Zanbatou!!

The priest's name is Anji

It does, doesn't it?


[img]graemlins/offtopic.gif[/img]


Oh yes, it was Anji! The one episode that was dedicated to uncovering his past was interesting, huh?

was it in the manga? cause that's what i'm reading..no tv for me XD

yup me nepalese, my grandad had a realllly sharp one... he'd never let me touch that khukuri tho *wonder why*

awesome, you been there? last time i was there, was like 3-4 years ago ~_~l;;

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.

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.

For anyone who have missed it, here's an interresting read by Memnoch (9th post from the top). It deals with a comparison between a medieval European knight and a samurai, but takes up the issue of Western vs. Japanese swords.

Link.

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]So? I am discussing our disagreement. It (Zuvio's post) stereotypes to a huge extent. It also lumps all swords produced by the west as being "Stiff, Log, Heavy metal", in short, unweildy pieces of crap .This is simply not true. Zuvious also states blades from the east as requiring a "Skilled touch". This is true of any blade. The Katana, for example while overrated IS an excellent weapon, though it's not the "end all uber sword" that many make it appear to be. What I have a problem with, is the gross lumping of all western swords as brutal hacking tools. Yes, your right. We disagree. His statement simply isn't true.

[ 01-02-2005, 07:21 PM: Message edited by: Sir Degrader ]