Poll of the Day > Longsword vs Katana

(+) Yeah! (+)

Had to post this because someone said about how magical the Katana was, but i didn't want to respond in that topic because it would of been inappropriate and all that!

So Katana vs longsword, that ancient debate....

So overall the Longsword is better in pretty much every way.

It is made from Steel made from Iron Ore, a much more pure form of Iron than the Iron "Sand" used for Katana's, why? Because Japan had crap Iron and it was rare, Japanese smiths are likely they best around, because they made usable weapons from shit basically!

A sword made from more pure Iron will be lighter, stronger and stay sharper for longer.

A Longsword is longer (it is a 2 handed weapon after all), not quite as good at cutting because of no curvature mind you, though a significantly better lunge, and the much better cross guard too.

It is less likely to break when hitting something hard too, like another sword.

Now onto the fighters, Samurai vs Knights.

Again Knights win, why? Better kit.

Training wise both started at very young ages being taught by masters of all things war, equal there. Though Knights have an edge in fighting different opponents meaning they had to improve and fight vs a variety of styles and weapons. Samurai mostly fought each other.

The main "Weapons" of a Knight (including the longsword) could work against the armour of the time (It had to!) Samurai weapons being mostly cutting blades, would be useless against it. (no they could not magically hit the none existent "weak points" either, firstly they still had some protection there, secondly see above about skill)

The armies again Western! Why? Training and kit

See the theme here? By the 14th century Western armies had cannons and well equipped soldiers with armour and forged steal spears, longbows ect. Samurai? They were still mostly fighting like they did in the 11th century, firearms did not really come into play until the 16th century!!! The Samurai would field mostly "Ashigaru" and these were mostly untrained mercs paid in loot, not a fully trained and equipped army!

Anyway, sorry for the rant, just had to get that off my chest!

For the record, I have done both Kendo and HEMA and I do reenactment, so have used a range of weapons, my fave? Arming sword and shield, as I am short, everyone using the long swords puts me at a real disadvantage, the shield removes that!
---

@shadowsword87
---

RCtheWSBC posted...

shadowsword87

Lol, cheers RC!
---

Mileena > Kitana
---

Longswords were soft, heavy bats that happened to have edges, katanas are oversized filleting knives.
---

@Kyuubi4269 posted...

Longswords were soft, heavy bats that happened to have edges, katanas are oversized filleting knives.

So wrong.....

Longswords were not "soft" nor were they "Heavy" or blunt! They could cut only slightly worse than a Katana, even then only because of the curved blade (better for cutting)

Katana were actually shorter AND heavier than a longsword.
---

Sorry the katana wins.

Also if you're comparing European steel and Japanese steel from say the 1300s, the Japanese steel won every time.

Also the long sword is harder to yield and has slower attacks. Going up against a more agile katana fighter, the longsworder is at a serious disadvantage.

There's a reason that in the modern cooking world, Japanese knives are the best.
---

Babbit55 posted...

A Longsword is longer (it is a 2 handed weapon after all)

Katanas are two handed, they have a longer handle ffs.

Babbit55 posted...

not quite as good at cutting because of no curvature mind you

Curve is for technique, it has no bearing on cutting potential.

Babbit55 posted...

though a significantly better lunge

Not really, just more weight for better penetration.

Babbit55 posted...

and the much better cross guard too.

They don't have a cross guard, so obvs.

Babbit55 posted...

It is less likely to break when hitting something hard too, like another sword.

More likely to dent and blunt, or should I say unavoidably will dent and blunt more, while katanas won't break if you use them sensibly.
---

Babbit, stop your nonsense.
---

Sorry the katana wins.

Also if you're comparing European steel and Japanese steel from say the 1300s, the Japanese steel won every time.

Wrong Tamahagane Steel, while ingenious in its creation, still had more impurities that Spring steel, also made the blade more brittle.

Also the long sword is harder to yield and has slower attacks. Going up against a more agile katana fighter, the longsworder is at a serious disadvantage.

Wrong! It is heavier and single bladed and is at a disadvantage when thrusting due to the curvature. I have studied both, you get faster swings with a Longsword as it has more momentum when swung properly so is actually faster and since it tended to be double bladed and have more advanced techniques like half blading it was more agile and versatile, while being longer, lighter AND stronger.

There's a reason that in the modern cooking world, Japanese knives are the best.

Literally nothing to do with Katana
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Katanas are two handed, they have a longer handle ffs.

Never said they weren't, just longswords are commonly confused with the shorter, single handed arming blade.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Curve is for technique, it has no bearing on cutting potential.

https://www.scienceabc.com/eyeopeners/curved-swords-vs-straight-swords-better.html

Curved is better at cutting, straight is better for lunging, this is fact. Also a Katana is curved a side effect of the back hardening in forging originally.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Not really, just more weight for better penetration.

Weight has no baring on penetration. I mean look at the king of thrusting weapons, Rapier.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

More likely to dent and blunt, or should I say unavoidably will dent and blunt more, while katanas won't break if you use them sensibly.

Actually, because of the folded razor edge a Katana is more likely to blunt and dent from use than a spring steel sword, it is a much softer steel, that is why in Kendo you do not block, you deflect. The longsword has a blunt portion at at the lower end of the blade for blocking (still better to not be in the way like) and for half blading.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Sorry the katana wins.

Also if you're comparing European steel and Japanese steel from say the 1300s, the Japanese steel won every time.

Also the long sword is harder to yield and has slower attacks. Going up against a more agile katana fighter, the longsworder is at a serious disadvantage.

There's a reason that in the modern cooking world, Japanese knives are the best.

c'mon you can do better than that, is this bait?
---

This topic is acutally interesting. Tagging.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Going up against a more agile katana fighter, the longsworder is at a serious disadvantage.

Nonsense aside, maille armour (chainmail as its known) is designed to stop cutting (hence why butchers still use it to this day), This armour technology from the 4th century basically stops the Katana. Nevermind much more effective plate!
---

Fiiiiine.

That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Bastard Sword" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.
Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.
Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas:
(One-Handed Exotic Weapon)
1d12 Damage
19-20 x4 Crit
+2 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon)
2d10 Damage
17-20 x4 Crit
+5 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.
---

shadowsword87 posted...

Fiiiiine.

That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Bastard Sword" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.
Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.
Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas:
(One-Handed Exotic Weapon)
1d12 Damage
19-20 x4 Crit
+2 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon)
2d10 Damage
17-20 x4 Crit
+5 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.

Yeah, that's the shitpost! (That is clearly satire I hope)

I personally think Masterwork bastard sword is about right though. D20 makes that misconception that "Longsword" is a 1 handed weapon, really the longsword should be the bastard sword and the Short sword should be an arming sword.
---

Babbit55 posted...

Yeah, that's the s***post! (That is clearly satire I hope)

I don't think it was satire the first time it was posted, people would get hilariously hard over the katana a while back.
I'm posting it because RC pinged me, and I really love how dumb the post is. Like really enjoy it.

Babbit55 posted...

I personally think Masterwork bastard sword is about right though. D20 makes that misconception that "Longsword" is a 1 handed weapon, really the longsword should be the bastard sword and the Short sword should be an arming sword.

I'm of the opinion that for RPGs, the stats on the weapon don't really matter as long as everyone has fun. So you can call a katana a battleax mechanically or whatever, there's much worse stuff you can be doing and happy players make happy games so whatever.
---

shadowsword87 posted...

I'm of the opinion that for RPGs, the stats on the weapon don't really matter as long as everyone has fun. So you can call a katana a battleax mechanically or whatever, there's much worse stuff you can be doing and happy players make happy games so whatever.

100% agree. gameplay over stats everytime
---

Babbit55 posted...

Curved is better at cutting, straight is better for lunging, this is fact. Also a Katana is curved a side effect of the back hardening in forging originally

Ignoring that you agree it's intentional now...

Curved goes better with a natural swing but the curve doesn't make it cut better.

Babbit55 posted...

Weight has no baring on penetration. I mean look at the king of thrusting weapons, Rapier.

A rapier is a dueling weapon and, like the katana, is for unarmoured opponents. Weight is a major component of penetration, it help maintain momentum which means better travel through plate. You like European weaponry so you must remember the not at all flimsy lance over the common spear.

Babbit55 posted...

Actually, because of the folded razor edge a Katana is more likely to blunt and dent from use than a spring steel sword

Folding doesn't make steel more prone to denting. Remember this, European swords were made with two edges because they got blunt in combat, the steel was insufficient to maintain an edge long.

Babbit55 posted...

it is a much softer steel, that is why in Kendo you do not block, you deflect

You deflect because you take on less of the force, this is taught in many, if not all, japanese martial arts.

Babbit55 posted...

The longsword has a blunt portion at at the lower end of the blade for blocking (still better to not be in the way like) and for half blading.

No, some longswords weren't sharpened near the hilt for handling, more specifically for a lunge holding it like a spear. The Zweihander, a greatsword, was made with a blunt section after the guard specifically for handling like a spear because its length and weight lent itself to this purpose.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Curved goes better with a natural swing but the curve doesn't make it cut better.

https://www.keithfarrell.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/The-Shape-of-Sword-Blades.pdf

We may say that the effect of the curve in this Indian tulwar, as
compared with a straight blade, is, that it cuts as though it were four times as broad
and only one-fourth the thickness. I have selected the tulwar as an illustration,
because we have all heard of the extraordinary effects produced by the natives of
India in cutting with this weapon. Men inferior in stature and bodily strength to our
own countrymen can use this weapon so as to produce effects which strike us with
astonishment:heads taken offboth hands severed at the wristarm and shoulder
cut throughlegs taken off at one blow. Such are the sword-cuts of [414] which our
soldiers had too fearful experience during the Sikh war and later campaigns in India

Curved is better at cutting. Period.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

A rapier is a dueling weapon and, like the katana, is for unarmoured opponents. Weight is a major component of penetration, it help maintain momentum which means better travel through plate. You like European weaponry so you must remember the not at all flimsy lance over the common spear.

The katana was a battlefield weapon as much as the longsword, also the Lance and spear were designed very differently yet both for lunging attacks, the Lance however should not be confused with a much wider and broader, jousting lance, this was not designed to kill!. A lance used in combat looked much more like a spear or pike, than a jousting lance that you seeming think was used on the battlefield.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Folding doesn't make steel more prone to denting. Remember this, European swords were made with two edges because they got blunt in combat, the steel was insufficient to maintain an edge long.

No the folding made it very thin and sharp, it also meant it was very prone to chipping and nicking while being used and blunted much faster than a broader edge.
Kyuubi4269 posted...

No, some longswords weren't sharpened near the hilt for handling, more specifically for a lunge holding it like a spear. The Zweihander, a greatsword, was made with a blunt section after the guard specifically for handling like a spear because its length and weight lent itself to this purpose.

I literally say about half blading (made for a much better lunge as i said!) the side effect was that you could get that flat edge in the way of a blade and A - Have more control of the opposing blade as you have the leverage and B - prevent the blade getting nicked and chipped from contact.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t4ojjzJJZ4

Not the most accurate or scientific video, but see the differences from a modern day, forged katana, and an edged hunk of steel!
---

a katana is a 2handed weapon also (when used correctly)
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

a katana is a 2handed weapon also (when used correctly)

Noone is saying it isn't, I was more pointing out that the Longsword is often confused with the single handed blade the Arming sword. A longsword was a 2 handed blade too.
---

shadowsword87 posted...

Fiiiiine.

That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Bastard Sword" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.
Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.
Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas:
(One-Handed Exotic Weapon)
1d12 Damage
19-20 x4 Crit
+2 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon)
2d10 Damage
17-20 x4 Crit
+5 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.

Lmao

glorious nippon steel is folded over 10 million times to make it the hardest material in the world.
---

Katana.
---

Babbit55 posted...

Curved is better at cutting. Period.

As I said, technique. If you draw the blade to cut then it'll cut better than if you cleave and katana also decapite and cut limbs clean off with a clean swing despite the much shallower angle. The width helps the cut.

Babbit55 posted...

The katana was a battlefield weapon as much as the longsword, also the Lance and spear were designed very differently yet both for lunging attacks, the Lance however should not be confused with a much wider and broader, jousting lance, this was not designed to kill!. A lance used in combat looked much more like a spear or pike, than a jousting lance that you seeming think was used on the battlefield.

Jujitsu was made because two samurai in armour can't do shit to eachother with swords, bare hand fighting is literally better. And all lances are big fuck off things, you don't get small lances.

Babbit55 posted...

No the folding made it very thin and sharp, it also meant it was very prone to chipping and nicking while being used and blunted much faster than a broader edge.

No, folding is just a smithing technique to make the metal more consistent throughout, the design was slimmer independent of folding. It's prone to chipping because its hardness is higher, while being softer and thinner would cause distortion and tears.

They did not blunt quickly, the hardness saw to that and I'm sure there will be a knife enthusiast here who could steer you in the right direction regarding blade composition and performance.

Babbit55 posted...

I literally say about half blading (made for a much better lunge as i said!) the side effect was that you could get that flat edge in the way of a blade and A - Have more control of the opposing blade as you have the leverage and B - prevent the blade getting nicked and chipped from contact.

That nicking is desirable in blocking, it's called bite, that gave more control.

Babbit55 posted...

Not the most accurate or scientific video, but see the differences from a modern day, forged katana, and an edged hunk of steel!

A big piece of metal breaks a small piece?? Colour me impressed you figured that out!

Softer steels absorb more shock, on hard impacts soft steels are better off and allowed europeans to use their swords as bats. They don't hold a steep edge well, they don't keep any edge long but they are easier to sharpen. These are the tradeoffs of a soft metal.

Katana were made for soft targets, were given a very steep sharpening angle and were very well maintained, Japan cultivated an environment where their swords would last despite damage to the metal being more severe, so the edge would be superior.
---

https://goo.gl/SZDCjL

Lances were not all big fuck off things

Ah yes all those battles where everyone wrestle instead of stabbing each other.....

Chipping is not good for blocking and gave you 0 extra control. Nor is it good for your blade!

As someone who has fought using historical combat manuals, I will tell you for sure, you dont use a long sword like a bat! Have you ever been in a sword fight?
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Folding doesn't make steel more prone to denting. Remember this, European swords were made with two edges because they got blunt in combat, the steel was insufficient to maintain an edge long.

They weren't two edged because they got blunt.
---

a long sword can actually pierce plate and chainmail

a katana cant

dont get me wrong, its amazing what the japanese did with absolute shit materials, but they dont really compare.
---

Wow... that OP is almost completely wrong. Let's disect this.

Babbit55 posted...

It is made from Steel made from Iron Ore, a much more pure form of Iron than the Iron "Sand" used for Katana's, why? Because Japan had crap Iron and it was rare, Japanese smiths are likely they best around, because they made usable weapons from shit basically!

The inverse of this is also true; because Western smiths had higher quality steel, there were many garbage smiths around who could get away with shitty forging because the material allowed them to. Contrast with Japan where one of the cardinal rules of warfare at the time was that when you were invading an enemy city, swordsmiths and their families were always, always to be left unharmed, because they were far more valuable as new employees rather than corpses.

Babbit55 posted...

A sword made from more pure Iron will be lighter, stronger and stay sharper for longer.

This completely ignores that the design and balance of katana vs. longswords are completely different, and that's going to have a far larger effect on weight.

Babbit55 posted...

A Longsword is longer (it is a 2 handed weapon after all)

So is a katana (derp). As for which one is longer, that again depends on the design. Today all katana have a relatively uniform length, with variances based on the height of the wielder, but this was not the case historically. In their early incarnations, it was quite common to see Sephiroth-esque katana that were so large they could not be effectively wielded on foot (for a period of time, samurai mostly fought on horseback, and their sword design of the time reflected that).

Babbit55 posted...

though a significantly better lunge, and the much better cross guard too.

Lunge: Highly debatable. Longswords really aren't designed for thrusting - the length makes them unwieldy and difficult to aim properly; they, like most long-bladed weapons, are primarily designed with slashing in mind. On the other hand, katana are actually deceptively good at lunging attacks. A tsuki (thrust) with a katana doesn't have the same reach as a longsword, but thanks to the blade's curvature a thrust doesn't open up a hole so much as it carves a very large, very deep gash in an opponent (seriously, you can get a ten-inch cut by moving the sword just a few inches forward).

Cross-Guard: The katana's tsuba (what you're referring to as a cross-guard) is actually not a cross-guard at all - it's basically a design feature to keep the wielder's hand from inadvertently sliding up onto the blade (and not all historical katana had them). Katana swing much faster than longswords - a significant point in their favour, by the way - so catching with a crossguard is impractical. Not to mention, in a clash katana tend to "bite" into one another due to the way the blade is designed, so a cut that would slide all the way down to the hilt would be fairly rare.
---

Babbit55 posted...

It is less likely to break when hitting something hard too, like another sword.

No knight or samurai that had a brain would ever willingly hit something hard. It happens sometimes, but the popular image of knights banging their swords off each other is pure Hollywood - about the only thing you'd get from doing that is a blunt blade.

Babbit55 posted...

The main "Weapons" of a Knight (including the longsword) could work against the armour of the time (It had to!) Samurai weapons being mostly cutting blades, would be useless against it. (no they could not magically hit the none existent "weak points" either, firstly they still had some protection there, secondly see above about skill)

The standard equipment of the samurai included guns from the 1500s onwards, which kind of kicks the ass of anything the knights could bring to bear.

And no, knights did not typically use longswords against heavy armour like plate mail (see above point about blunt blades). Standard weapons to deal with armour involved things like warhammers (which virtually every fictional representation depicts incorrectly - you hit with the pick on the "back" of the hammer, with the large "front" being used to provide weight to drive that pick into the armour), arrows (which, if properly designed, could easily punch through full-plate) or heavy weapons that could knock a knight over, at which point they could be easily dispatched by a knife in their armour joints.

You've claimed a background in kendo, TC, but unless your school was pretty lacklustre or simply focused on shinai training rather than working much with the actual blades themselves, I'm actually surprised you don't know more about the katana. A lot of what you posted was misinformed at best, completely wrong at worst. As a suggestion, you may want to supplement your kendo training with some iai, as I find you don't get a full appreciation for what's involved in using a katana without both.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Jujitsu was made because two samurai in armour can't do shit to eachother with swords, bare hand fighting is literally better.

Not really true. Jujutsu was generally not something a samurai employed by choice, except in last resort cases where he had lost his weapons and/or otherwise been disarmed. This is why many classical jujutsu techniques are against an armed opponent, rather than against another unarmed grappler.
---

darkknight109 posted...

The inverse of this is also true; because Western smiths had higher quality steel, there were many garbage smiths around who could get away with shitty forging because the material allowed them to. Contrast with Japan where one of the cardinal rules of warfare at the time was that when you were invading an enemy city, swordsmiths and their families were always, always to be left unharmed, because they were far more valuable as new employees rather than corpses.

You know you just reworded my opening about Japanese smiths being likely the best right?

darkknight109 posted...

This completely ignores that the design and balance of katana vs. longswords are completely different, and that's going to have a far larger effect on weight.

Kinda, though to ensure the Katana had a sharp edge it needed the thick back meaning the hard steel back made it heavier, the Longsword being made of better steel could be stronger, while being lighter.

darkknight109 posted...

So is a katana (derp). As for which one is longer, that again depends on the design. Today all katana have a relatively uniform length, with variances based on the height of the wielder, but this was not the case historically. In their early incarnations, it was quite common to see Sephiroth-esque katana that were so large they could not be effectively wielded on foot (for a period of time, samurai mostly fought on horseback, and their sword design of the time reflected that).

Firstly, as I have mentioned (twice now) I mentioned that, not because the Katana is a 1 handed blade (It wasn't) but because there is a very common misconeption that the longsword was (It wasn't). The Sephiroph-esque Katana.... You mean the No-Dachi.... That was slightly longer than your avarage long sword.... One the Length Sephiroph used would be insanly unweildly.

darkknight109 posted...

Lunge: Highly debatable. Longswords really aren't designed for thrusting - the length makes them unwieldy and difficult to aim properly; they, like most long-bladed weapons, are primarily designed with slashing in mind. On the other hand, katana are actually deceptively good at lunging attacks. A tsuki (thrust) with a katana doesn't have the same reach as a longsword, but thanks to the blade's curvature a thrust doesn't open up a hole so much as it carves a very large, very deep gash in an opponent (seriously, you can get a ten-inch cut by moving the sword just a few inches forward).

Curved just cannot get the same force behind a lunge that straight blade can (This is physics). Half handed thrusting with a longsword though was very effective and a very comon teqnique to get though armour, but yes the main attacks at more slashing in style of a longsword.

http://aif.md/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/34-%D0%94%D1%83%D1%8D%D0%BB%D1%8C.jpeg

As was pomel and cross guard stikes (Murder strokes)

darkknight109 posted...

Cross-Guard: The katana's tsuba (what you're referring to as a cross-guard) is actually not a cross-guard at all - it's basically a design feature to keep the wielder's hand from inadvertently sliding up onto the blade (and not all historical katana had them). Katana swing much faster than longswords - a significant point in their favour, by the way - so catching with a crossguard is impractical. Not to mention, in a clash katana tend to "bite" into one another due to the way the blade is designed, so a cut that would slide all the way down to the hilt would be fairly rare.

Having trained and swung both I disagee on the "swing much faster" opinion, a proper longsword swing is faster, especially the tip, because of momentum (again physics)
---

I assumed this was another Monster Hunter topic
---

darkknight109 posted...

Cross-Guard: The katana's tsuba (what you're referring to as a cross-guard) is actually not a cross-guard at all - it's basically a design feature to keep the wielder's hand from inadvertently sliding up onto the blade (and not all historical katana had them). Katana swing much faster than longswords - a significant point in their favour, by the way - so catching with a crossguard is impractical. Not to mention, in a clash katana tend to "bite" into one another due to the way the blade is designed, so a cut that would slide all the way down to the hilt would be fairly rare.

Having trained and swung both I disagee on the "swing much faster" opinion, a proper longsword swing is faster, especially the tip, because of momentum (again physics). Sword fighting has 2 rules, Don't get hit, hit them. In that order. The cross guard was great at stopping attacks hitting the hands, though they were used you A LOT more, the murder stroke being a big one. Anyone who teaches Katana would cringe about you talking about Katanas biting one another as them hitting like that is not wanted, and is not beneficial in any way.

darkknight109 posted...

No knight or samurai that had a brain would ever willingly hit something hard. It happens sometimes, but the popular image of knights banging their swords off each other is pure Hollywood - about the only thing you'd get from doing that is a blunt blade.

Agreed, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

The standard equipment of the samurai included guns from the 1500s onwards, which kind of kicks the ass of anything the knights could bring to bear.

And no, knights did not typically use longswords against heavy armour like plate mail (see above point about blunt blades). Standard weapons to deal with armour involved things like warhammers (which virtually every fictional representation depicts incorrectly - you hit with the pick on the "back" of the hammer, with the large "front" being used to provide weight to drive that pick into the armour), arrows (which, if properly designed, could easily punch through full-plate) or heavy weapons that could knock a knight over, at which point they could be easily dispatched by a knife in their armour joints.

You've claimed a background in kendo, TC, but unless your school was pretty lacklustre or simply focused on shinai training rather than working much with the actual blades themselves, I'm actually surprised you don't know more about the katana. A lot of what you posted was misinformed at best, completely wrong at worst. As a suggestion, you may want to supplement your kendo training with some iai, as I find you don't get a full appreciation for what's involved in using a katana without both.

Late 1500's (1543)

Sorta right on the Warhammer, though it was not for weight, it was for crushing joints, much easier to kill with the pick if they cannot move there legs or arms! Also if they were on there arse, it would not be going in close for a knife, it would be a murder stroke, or a warhammer strike. Yes, some arrows could pierce plate, though not "easily" Just ask the French, they designed armour to deflect arrows, but yeah. the Longbows won Agincourt

I have done longsword for a lot longer than Kendo (8 yrs vs 3) and he didn't go much into the blades themselves, more the technique and the like, though I am a sword enthusiast and I have read up about Katana, please point out my misinformation though. You agree the mats were crap, and better at cutting with softer, easy to break blades. Where about I misinformed?
---

As for Firearms, they started use in European armies in the 1300's (1364) so by the late 1500's Knights would of been a dying bread in favour of the much more effective gun.
---

Blighboy posted...

I assumed this was another Monster Hunter topic

I'm just here to post bad RPG shitposts that are years old.
---

That's it. I'm sick of all this "Katanas" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Bastard Swords deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.

I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine Bastard Sword in Germany for 10,000 Euros (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my Bastard Sword.

European smiths spend years working on a single Bastard Sword and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.

Bastard Swords are thrice as sharp as Japanese swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a Daisho can cut through, a Bastard Sword can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a Bastard Sword could easily bisect a samurai wearing pieces of wood for armor with a simple horizontal slash.

Ever wonder why Japan never bothered conquering Medieval Europe? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Knights and their Bastard Swords of destruction. Even in World War II, Japanese soldiers targeted the men with the Bastard Swords first because their killing power was feared and respected.

So what am I saying? Bastard Swords are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Bastard Swords:

(One-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d12 Damage 19-20 x4 Crit +2 to hit and damage Counts as Masterwork

(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon) 2d10 Damage 17-20 x4 Crit +5 to hit and damage Counts as Masterwork

Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Bastard Swords in real life, don't you think?

tl;dr = Bastard Swords need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.
---

Babbit55 posted...

Having trained and swung both I disagee on the "swing much faster" opinion, a proper longsword swing is faster, especially the tip, because of momentum (again physics).

Disagree. My own personal experience along with consensus from some of the other sword-nuts I hang around with is that the katana is noticeably faster for slashing. Admittedly the longsword tends to have an advantage on thrusts, although the technique behind thrusting with a longsword and performing an equivalent tsuki with a katana is different.

Babbit55 posted...

Anyone who teaches Katana would cringe about you talking about Katanas biting one another as them hitting like that is not wanted, and is not beneficial in any way.

Strange, because we talk about that in iai all the time and it absolutely is a real thing. It's not really a matter of "wanted" or "not wanted", it's just a reality of the sword.

Ever held a shinken (live blade)? When you place it against another blade (not cross-wise, but parallel, the same way you would hold it if you were fighting someone), they really do bite into one another; two sharp katana simply don't slide against one another the way most European swords do. It almost feels like the blade is slightly magnetic (the actual reason has to do with the sharpness and the angle of the cutting edge, but the sensation is similar).

Babbit55 posted...

Sorta right on the Warhammer, though it was not for weight, it was for crushing joints, much easier to kill with the pick if they cannot move there legs or arms!

Ever tried to hit someone on a joint with a big heavy weapon? It typically doesn't go well. Joints are attached to limbs, which are the most mobile parts of your body (AKA the hardest things to hit, particularly with any accuracy). If you're going to go for a hit with the heavy end of the weapon, aim for the centre of mass - if you hit them hard enough, you stand a decent chance of killing them (armour or no) and even if you don't, you can knock them off balance.
---

Babbit55 posted...

Yes, some arrows could pierce plate, though not "easily" Just ask the French.

Sure it could. Youtube is loaded with videos of people shooting holes in plate mail. Here's the first one I came up with:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCE40J93m5c

I went to a demo many years ago where a professional archer using a period-authentic bow fired 40 arrows in under a minute at a breast plate hung on the wall and the arrows went straight through it.

Babbit55 posted...

please point out my misinformation though

Mostly it was the stuff I've already gone through - stuff like a tsuba not being a true cross-guard, or the particulars of how the blade operates.

Honestly, having done kendo myself, one of my frustrations with the art in its modern incarnation is it spends a lot of time with shinai and very little with actual blades. Hence my recommendation to add iaido into your training if you're into swords - iaido focuses a lot more on using the sword itself rather than a stand-in. Of course, iaido has its own drawbacks, namely that most schools spend almost no time on two-person exercises or target practice - you really do need both arts to fully understand how a katana operates.

Babbit55 posted...

You agree the mats were crap, and better at cutting with softer, easy to break blades

As a metallurgist, I can tell you that even shitty ore can be made into a decent final product (and vice versa). Don't be so quick to write off katanas as "softer and easier to break", because in many cases that was not the case (Japanese ore may have been awful compared to its European equivalents, but their smithing techniques were leagues ahead).
---

tbh, katana worship is one of the silliest things on the internet. And, while they're venerated today, the katana was basically a back-up weapon for samurai who would first rely on bows or polearms in battle. Likewise, as armor became prevalent, the longsword was less likely to be used in battle than armor-penetrating weapons. Ultimately swords are a great sidearm for civilian contexts (because it could be a pain to carry around larger weapons and a sword works wonders vs unarmored opponents), but they eventually rank low when it comes to warfare because weapons with better reach or greater penetration are more practical.

At any rate, where longsword and katana is concerned, it's somewhat hard to compare the two since he longsword had a lot of variety whereas the katana's design was more standard.
---

darkknight109 posted...

Disagree. My own personal experience along with consensus from some of the other sword-nuts I hang around with is that the katana is noticeably faster for slashing. Admittedly the longsword tends to have an advantage on thrusts, although the technique behind thrusting with a longsword and performing an equivalent tsuki with a katana is different.

No offence here, have you trained with a longsword at all? They are swung in very different ways, the Longsword uses its momentum more in the swing, at least more than a Katana does, swinging them the same way, a katana will feel faster, that swung properly, the longsword is faster.

But yes, they are used in very dfferent ways, even if they are often compared (I would say a more acurate sword to compare would be a Falchion personaly)

darkknight109 posted...

Strange, because we talk about that in iai all the time and it absolutely is a real thing. It's not really a matter of "wanted" or "not wanted", it's just a reality of the sword.

Ever held a shinken (live blade)? When you place it against another blade (not cross-wise, but parallel, the same way you would hold it if you were fighting someone), they really do bite into one another; two sharp katana simply don't slide against one another the way most European swords do. It almost feels like the blade is slightly magnetic (the actual reason has to do with the sharpness and the angle of the cutting edge, but the sensation is similar).

I have, not used them in a fight (obviously!), though every bit of defence I have been taught about Katana work as been deflection and avoidence because the blades clashing is not a good thing (not that the edged parts of long swords are either to be fair!)

darkknight109 posted...

Ever tried to hit someone on a joint with a big heavy weapon? It typically doesn't go well. Joints are attached to limbs, which are the most mobile parts of your body (AKA the hardest things to hit, particularly with any accuracy). If you're going to go for a hit with the heavy end of the weapon, aim for the centre of mass - if you hit them hard enough, you stand a decent chance of killing them (armour or no) and even if you don't, you can knock them off balance.

They are not as heavy as you might think, they are pretty top heavy though! Saying that, it is easier to smash a leg with a vague hammer blow than a precice pierce with the point, specially while the other person does not what that to happen!

Fightning in armour is a funny thing, you kind of ignore blows that you know would not be too threatening, like ignoring a leg swing in favour of slapping your mate across the head! (I have been hit with a "combat safe" flail, it hurt like hell though armour!!! (Cricket ball on a chain)

darkknight109 posted...

Sure it could. Youtube is loaded with videos of people shooting holes in plate mail. Here's the first one I came up with:

No disagreements on arrows here, as I said, ask the French (agincourt was won by the bow)
---

darkknight109 posted...

Mostly it was the stuff I've already gone through - stuff like a tsuba not being a true cross-guard, or the particulars of how the blade operates.

Honestly, having done kendo myself, one of my frustrations with the art in its modern incarnation is it spends a lot of time with shinai and very little with actual blades. Hence my recommendation to add iaido into your training if you're into swords - iaido focuses a lot more on using the sword itself rather than a stand-in. Of course, iaido has its own drawbacks, namely that most schools spend almost no time on two-person exercises or target practice - you really do need both arts to fully understand how a katana operates.

I never said the Tsuba wasn't a "True cross guard" just that a cross guard (and especially a baskett hilt) is better. I will concide I have less experiance using a Katana than a Longsword though. I like sparing too much though to look at something that is pure tequique =P

darkknight109 posted...

As a metallurgist, I can tell you that even shitty ore can be made into a decent final product (and vice versa). Don't be so quick to write off katanas as "softer and easier to break", because in many cases that was not the case (Japanese ore may have been awful compared to its European equivalents, but their smithing techniques were leagues ahead).

I know, hence why Japanese smiths were geniuses!!! Though Masterwork shitty steel is still not as good as Avarage good steel, as they say, shit in, shit out. Now I know they were not likely to just snap and break for no reason (or just dull like someone though longswords do....), Just that incomparason a longsword being made of spring steel is less likely to break or have the same issues that a blade made from a lower quality steel may.
---

Babbit55 posted...

ask the French (agincourt was won by the bow)

...and that battle had an absurdly high number of prisoners because of good quality armor. Most of the plate seen in Youtube videos is cheap junk costume armor which folds under sword hits as well.
---

Ok but wich is easier to juggle? Or should I just stick to chainsaws?
---

The monster hunter longsword which is a giant katana.
---

Knights are definitely the coolest and most badass ancient warriors, I didn't see JRR Tolkien basing his legendarium off of Japan
---

Zeus posted...

At any rate, where longsword and katana is concerned, it's somewhat hard to compare the two since he longsword had a lot of variety whereas the katana's design was more standard.

Katana designs were anything but standardized, unless you're talking about relatively recently. Size and shape were highly variable, from short swords to swords that were longer than the samurai using them was tall. Even the characteristic curve of the modern katana wasn't a universal design and, particularly in its earliest incarnations, straight-edged katana do exist.

Babbit55 posted...

No offence here, have you trained with a longsword at all?

Admittedly not much - most of my knowledge on longswords is second-hand through friends that have done more training with them than I have. That said, I have had the chance to train with them briefly in the past, so I have a passing familiarity with their mechanics.

I still stand by what I said that the katana is generally the faster weapon, though the difference is small (and dependent on what form of longsword you're using).

Babbit55 posted...

But yes, they are used in very dfferent ways, even if they are often compared (I would say a more acurate sword to compare would be a Falchion personaly)

Which is honestly why I find the discussion a bit silly whenever "katana vs. longsword" comes up. They look similar, but they are different weapons created under different conditions to address different battlefield issues. It's like comparing a steak knife to an ice cream scoop - which one is more effective depends entirely on whether you're eating steak or ice cream.

Babbit55 posted...

I have, not used them in a fight (obviously!), though every bit of defence I have been taught about Katana work as been deflection and avoidence because the blades clashing is not a good thing (not that the edged parts of long swords are either to be fair!)

Avoidance is certainly preferable, but there are blocks for when it's not possible or practical. Even beyond that, simply standing in a ready position with blade-to-blade you will feel the swords catching on one another - it's actually very weird to experience and it only happens with sharpened blades.

Babbit55 posted...

They are not as heavy as you might think, they are pretty top heavy though! Saying that, it is easier to smash a leg with a vague hammer blow than a precice pierce with the point, specially while the other person does not what that to happen!

You don't really need precision when you're driving a spike through someone's chest, though. You're basically doing the same thing with both swings, just using different sides of the weapon.
---

First of all, curved is much better for cutting. You have a larger surface area for the edge of the blade. There's a reason why cavalry swords were always curved. They didn't have to swing so much as simply hold their sword out as the curved edges would draw across flesh and slice through, whereas a long sword would simply get stuck into whatever it hit. So that bullshit about technique or whatever is just that. Curved swords effectively cut better than straight edges.

Now, I'm not a big fan of the Japanese, but military historians widely regard both the gladius and the katana as the two best developed swords in the world. They each excelled in their respective roles: the gladius as a short, thrusting weapon used in close combat in conjunction with the scutum (the roman shields that basically covered the entire left side of the soldier); and the katana as a two-handed weapon cutting weapon (but yes, it can also thrust, and I did practice Shinkendo for around 2 1/2 years -- I even got to spar with Toshishiro Obata for a couple minutes when he visited our dojo). The longsword is a long, straight, double-edged blade. It didn't cut as well as the katana, and as far as thrusting, yes it was long, but that's what made it unwieldy. For thrusting, you only needed to penetrate three inches into your opponent's midsection or torso. The gladius did that very well while allowing you to fully control your shield (which was the real workhorse). Also, because it's short, it's very easy to retract the blade after you hit your opponent for another thrust (likely at another opponent). In a crowded melee, you'll probably have to drop your longsword and draw your short sword or dagger after you pierce your opponent. As for the katana, you just cut through your opponent and your blade was free to strike at another. Of course, the katana wasn't designed to cut through opponents wearing full plate, so I couldn't really argue about it's effectiveness against a knight, but it definitely cut through conscripted soldiers with ease.

As for knight versus samurai, I don't care as it's just Deadliest Warrior crap. You can pretend to think you know who will win, but you really don't. Yeah, shields and shield walls were a huge part of western warfare, and in the east, samurai believed that only cowards hid behind shields and were ready to die for their lords in combat. Now, maybe the samurai were a bit naive about the effectiveness of hoplite shields or scutums, but their fanaticism in combat isn't some easily measured attribute. And anyway, samurai were trained in the use of many weapons (spears, bow, short swords, and hand-to-hand combat). Restricting a samurai to a katana, or even a knight with just a sword and shield for that matter, is like restricting LeBron to lay ups and Curry to dunks. Both fighters were highly trained in many different weapons and could use them effectively in the appropriate situations.

Anyway, I'm sorry but longswords versus katana doesn't seem like even a fair comparison. Because both weapons are wielded with two hands? A katana wielder could easily close in on a longsword and disarm the wielder due to the comparatively unwieldy nature of the weapon (when compared to the katana). The stance of the wielder, and the curved blade, which allows you to deflect more easily would make quick work of a longsword. Now if you want to throw a shield into the mix, you might as well ditch the sword altogether and grip the shield with two hands. A scutum versus a katana, now that'd be really interesting.

Who cares? The Boshin War proved guns > swords :P
---

I heard the curve of the Katana wasn't actually that significant for slashing compared to swords like the scimitar. Rather than an intentional design it's more a consequence of the differing hardness of the metal used. It's the top-heavy "axe" hacking that takes off limbs. A straight sword probably would've been better in that regard.

Saw already mentioned but longswords fell out of use with the emergence of plate. They started using stuff like rapiers and daggers.

...Yeah, take what I say with a grain of salt. Tons of the blind leading the blind.