Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post - A word or two about monks samurais and knights

Sir Kenyth · 09-04-2001, 11:22 AM

I've noticed quite a few threads about these characters leaning towards their real life counterparts. In these threads, people seem to think that movie and game depictions are true to life. Let's talk a bit more realistic about martial arts and the sword saints. Yes, they were highly disciplined and trained. Yes, they were quick. That does not make them superhuman or exempt from the laws of science. Things were developed for reasons. Bare hand martial arts were developed because the people did not have access to weapons. Many of the unusual martial arts weapons are converted farming implements. Armor and weapons were developed, quite simply, because they worked. Heavier swords were developed to deal with light armor. Spiked hammers, battle axes, and flanged mace were developed to deal with heavy plate armors which were all but impervious to slashing and stabbing. If you were to pit a sword saint or a shaolin monk one on one with an equally trained elite European knight, the knight would likely win. I can hear the dissent already. Why, you ask, do I think this? It's not a matter of honed skill, but a matter of physics. The classic katana is a slashing weapon and not effective at piercing steel plate. The knights weapons (broad sword, axe, flanged mace, etc.), on the other hand would destroy the samurais beautiful bamboo and woven cloth armor within a few hits because the material is designed to withstand slashing, not hacking and bashing. An unarmored monk would REALLY have a bad time. A pole axe or long spear would be his only hope and a slim one at that. The best weapons against armored knights are high powered projectile weapons. Heavy draw bows, crossbows, and firearms were developed for this very reason! Hardened steel spikes and bullets have very little trouble penetrating light steel plate at sufficient velocity. Which is why an armored knight would stand little chance against a modern soldier. It's all in the science of fighting. The correct tool for the job. Remember though, all the equipment in the world cannot compensate for a case of "Dumb-ass-itis". The mongols proved that when they defeated numerous armies and knights with guerrilla tactics, light calvary and stout bows firing armor peircing arrows. The headstrong and disorganized knights charged blindly into many ambushes where they were peppered with armor piercing arrows from high ground. Completely helpless because they could not reach their attackers, who kept backing up to stay out of hand to hand range. I'm sure the knights cried "Dishonorable!" all the way to defeat. The development of effective ranged weapons and ranged weapon tactics made the armored knight, and all other hand to hand troops, obsolete.

------------------
The true secret to happiness is not having what you want, it's wanting what you have!

09-04-2001, 11:22 AM	#1
Sir Kenyth Fzoul Chembryl Join Date: August 30, 2001 Location: somewhere Age: 54 Posts: 1,785	I've noticed quite a few threads about these characters leaning towards their real life counterparts. In these threads, people seem to think that movie and game depictions are true to life. Let's talk a bit more realistic about martial arts and the sword saints. Yes, they were highly disciplined and trained. Yes, they were quick. That does not make them superhuman or exempt from the laws of science. Things were developed for reasons. Bare hand martial arts were developed because the people did not have access to weapons. Many of the unusual martial arts weapons are converted farming implements. Armor and weapons were developed, quite simply, because they worked. Heavier swords were developed to deal with light armor. Spiked hammers, battle axes, and flanged mace were developed to deal with heavy plate armors which were all but impervious to slashing and stabbing. If you were to pit a sword saint or a shaolin monk one on one with an equally trained elite European knight, the knight would likely win. I can hear the dissent already. Why, you ask, do I think this? It's not a matter of honed skill, but a matter of physics. The classic katana is a slashing weapon and not effective at piercing steel plate. The knights weapons (broad sword, axe, flanged mace, etc.), on the other hand would destroy the samurais beautiful bamboo and woven cloth armor within a few hits because the material is designed to withstand slashing, not hacking and bashing. An unarmored monk would REALLY have a bad time. A pole axe or long spear would be his only hope and a slim one at that. The best weapons against armored knights are high powered projectile weapons. Heavy draw bows, crossbows, and firearms were developed for this very reason! Hardened steel spikes and bullets have very little trouble penetrating light steel plate at sufficient velocity. Which is why an armored knight would stand little chance against a modern soldier. It's all in the science of fighting. The correct tool for the job. Remember though, all the equipment in the world cannot compensate for a case of "Dumb-ass-itis". The mongols proved that when they defeated numerous armies and knights with guerrilla tactics, light calvary and stout bows firing armor peircing arrows. The headstrong and disorganized knights charged blindly into many ambushes where they were peppered with armor piercing arrows from high ground. Completely helpless because they could not reach their attackers, who kept backing up to stay out of hand to hand range. I'm sure the knights cried "Dishonorable!" all the way to defeat. The development of effective ranged weapons and ranged weapon tactics made the armored knight, and all other hand to hand troops, obsolete. ------------------ The true secret to happiness is not having what you want, it's wanting what you have!