Not 100% sure if this is the place to ask about this but whatever.

I am discussing what seems to be the most useless mele weapon unless you are trying to stealthily attack or you are aginst an unarmed opponent: Knives and knife adjacent weapons (excluding carving, butcher, and any other knives that are modifiedfor a specifice purpose).

Personally, they are my favorite but I am aware if how many downsides there are to them. First, they have very VERY terrible range. Against an opponent with almost any other longer range weapon will be hard for the person with the knife because they won't be able to find an opening for a quick attack. Second, Because they are so short you can barely defend yourself with them. Third, It's hard to get in a fatal hit with them. Compared to swords, slashing or attempting to chop off a limb is a dumb idea. It's only fatal move is stabing, and even so most positions to do it are hard to do in general.

I know that there are some good things about them though. First, they are light, and most likely won't hinder your movement, making it easier to move around, dodge, and attack quickly. Second, Because they are so small, it would be slightly easier to attack in cramped places compared to other long range melee weapons (except spears). Third, if by some miracle you DO manage to block or deflect a attack, it would be significantly easier to recover and get back into position.

I am no genius, and I doubt that some of the pros and cons I've listed are true in most cases or even have that much of a significant effect in combat. If anyone knows any more pros or cons, or any techniques using knives in combat; I would very much like you to share the information because I find knife combat (and blades in general) to be an interesting thing to know about.

To be more specific plate. Cutting, slashing everything else be damned. Our main priority is eating through as much metal as we can.

Started going into kickboxing and the mall strip school I go to while focusing on K1 Rules, there are lots of instructors from different styles because the primary intent is for gradual adaptation for MMA and Self-Defense (as the school has had a few local champions in MMA across the state and lots of police and military attend so it was catered for those two things).

As a result while my training is for general American style kickboxing and K1 competition, we are being given lessons on a variety of different basic techniques from different styles with the eventual plan is we all learn to master the fundamentals of all styles for the later purpose of competing in MMA or just knowing RBSD to defend ourselves outside of the school.

So we have instructors from every mainstream unarmed style out there including TKD, Kyokushin, Muay Thai, Savate, Sanda, Wing Chun, Silat, Judo, BJJ, Hapkido, Aikido, Sambo, Catch Wrestling, and a bunch of different styles I can't remember the names of.

Because I'm mostly interested in swordsmanship and this is just a side show, of course in my free time I been mostly practising with swords. But in the last 3 workouts I kickboxed prior to sword training at home and I also mixed in unarmed moves with kicking.

What I noticed is despite already losing some of my endurance in the first phrase of my daily workouts (kickboxing), when I practise mixing sword attacks with unarmed moves, its MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH easier to throw kicks when I'm holding a sword in my hand (even though my legs are already tired from the prior kickboxing warmup session). This is esp true with "Medium" two handed weapons that are not too long in length and not too heavy in weight such as the katana and European medieval longsword where I'm holding both my hands while doing a timed side kick or low sweeping move or Savate's fouette or stomp attack.Its so easy to knee I find myself doing it far more outside of the "clinching range" esp in the outboxer punching range because holding on the sword esp sideways gives me the leverage and stability to throw knees repeatedly without tripping or losing balance and falling (which is the same reason why in Muay Thai knees are almost exclusively thrown at clinch range-its very easy to lose balance if done at punching range and further and thus open you up to enemy's attacks).

Kicks I can barely do in my kickboxing class I now find myself doing with ease like riding a bike when I practise with swords such as TKD's numerous spinning reverse kicks and Sanda's high kicks to the head and chest.

Has anyone else experienced this when adding kicks into their weapons training? Thats its much easier holding a weapon in hand than just barefisted? Whats the reason for this?

Went to a special store specializing primarily in occult stuff than also sells other nerdy pursuits like martial arts weapons, Renaissance faire merchandise, fantasy novels, etc.

In the weapons section one of the weapons on display was a European arming sword replica specifically based on models commonly sold to a HEMA organization I can't remember the name of. I was allowed to use it and I was really amazed how despite being a bit heavier than the katana I mentioned in my last post, it was so freaking light with one hand and much easier to wield.

However when I tried to practise moves with it with two hands, it felt sorta awkward. I was still able to effectively use the katana moves I was practising but for some reason I felt it was different and the handle felt strange. Interestingly when I was toying around with it one handed,I was able to use Musashi's one-handed katana moves in his famous short sword and long sword style with fluid ease, like it was an immediate one-on-one transition. Normally I would just assume it was because they were two different beasts much like how PS4 and Xbox One despite similar architectures are still different animals.......

Except days ago an Arabian Scimitar arrived by mail. While it was a bit shorter (17 inches compared to the 2 feet Arming sword at the occult store and Katana I owned and practised with for almost 2 weeks already), the same exact feeling came. Easy to swing one handed and using dual knife and katana Kenjutsu techniques was not different at all and didn't require efforts for adjusting. Yet the moment I started wielding it two handed and using kendo moves, it was even far more awkward than the arming sword was. In the Arabian scimitar's case despite similar feels to both the katana and arming sword and actually weighing less and being a bit shorter, was actually a bit difficult swinging two handed (and not even specific Samurai swordsmanships but just flailing it around period). I actually had to change my grip in certain ways in order for it to finally start feeling smooth unlike the arming sword (where I can still stick with the basic Kendo and general Samurai sword styles despite feeling sorta different and I eventually got a hang of it later after I purchased items at the occult store and asked to play with the arming sword one more time).

Is this feeling natural? People always assume someone who can wield a sword that is commonly just as much 1 handed as 2 handed, even far more effectively if they decide to go use two hands instead of one. The common assumption is that using something like a military Jian one handed would mean they would have an easier time using it two handed because they must have more strength per arm and more skill overall because of use of one arm. So people expect someone using a Viking sword in one arm and suddenly changing to a two handed stance would mean they just increased their skill automatically by 300%+ or higher.

True I'm just a beginner and I just finally learned how to use basic katana moves right. But my experience toying with my newly arrived by mail scimitar and earlier today European knight's sword makes me doubt the notion that a sword that was commonly used as both 1 hands and 2 hands automatically means a complete skill boost changing to two hands and much easier to wield also as a result of being able to use 2 arms instead of one. I'm now starting to call BS on that commonly accepted belief. That swords more specifically intended for both hands even if it was commonly used with a single arm (like my katana) are actually easier to wield double handed than swords commonly used both 1 and 2 arms but more specialized towards 1 handed grip (like the typical knight longsword and Middle Eastern scimitar) in a similar two handed manner.

Can anyone clarify? BTW based on my experience would this mean attempting to wield blades strictly for one handed use like a cavalry saber be far harder two handed than one handed (even say you remove the hand protections forcing you to hold it one hand such as the Tulwar's special hilt)? So using a Gladius (even though later versions had longer hilts and similar sizes and weight distribution to arming swords) would be completely ineffective as a two handed sword?

new move i made up: Divebomb, tackle your target then kick them. If theres no rules, you know where to aim.

I live in a country where attacking someone who assaults your home will make you end up in prison for homicide, as well as being sued for any damage done. Also, guns are absolutely illegal so if someone will say "just get a gun!!", then I tell you beforehand that it isnt an option

The idea is simple; a baton/club/billy club, that is covered by a hard but not-lethal rubber, with basically the same material used in boxing gloves. I have had the luck to be hit by some of them in friendly fights and let me tell you, while the risk of dying is minimal it is stunning as hell. Probably that would work as a self defense weapon with a high stopping power but minimal lethality? It might even have a layer of such rubber in one side (for head), and the tough one for arms and legs.

Also, it could be even better if such club had a trigger in the handle which sprays pepper spray from the end of it to target the enemie's eyes while you get in a guard position, forcing the assaulter to follow you covering their eyes or not looking at you

The blade has sharp edges on both sides, but the segment on top is blunt because it’s supposed to be a catching hook for opposing weapons. The center of mass is in the dead center of the handle. The part of the scythe that goes down is supposed to be a scimitar type blade, and on the opposite side is a sickle. I also didn’t have enough room for the handle, so ye;_;

Drew this scythe in class is it cool or not

I’m a writer and artist that’s working on a fantasy series about heroes using swords, and I really want to know what kind of sword this is so I can get more references for my design.

Prepare to receive the true Lord

First time poster, I found this reddit through the recommended list on /r/swords where I lurk.

I was curious about the difference in opinion/philosophy between European spear versus the Japanese Naginata art.

I watched a video (Seki-sensei) that briefly mentioned that the naginata was not as common as the katana, and very little of the schools/students of naginata remain.

My thought was that the European spear was often referred to as the king of weapons. It had such high status and praise, and I'm curious why there are two such different opinions on this weapon?

I apologize if my thoughts are a mess, I'm more of a pocket-knife collector than a martial artist or student of weaponry.

Thank you for any help/thoughts.

currently working on a story set in the real world but with supernatural monsters to deal with. trying to figure out which weapons to give out to my characters, of which there are 5. i dont want them all to just use the same exact things, but i already have:

• one character with a bat and switchblade
• another with a bat
• one who just has a gun
• one with a switchblade and an axe

was wondering if there’s any other weapons i missed that i could give the last one?

for some added story context, they’re from the rural south and the monsters they deal with are similar to real ones you’d find in the area, but they look a bit freakier and have the ability to get in your head and attack you that way. they’re more brutal in attacks than a real animal too ofc

any help greatly appreciated!

View Poll

i was thinking kanabo but unsure

https://preview.redd.it/ykvekcgz1ryc1.png?width=540&format=png&auto=webp&s=08eb6c1e03d3553d40c9a796fcd2b01680bbacd3

Just saw the good old cliche by someone of how he argues how weak and overrated Katanas and and literally believes all European swords are superior to Japanese swords (which going by his argument it implies he's assuming they are all katanas) because he saw a two handed sword thats smaller than the stereotypical Zweihander but still considerably longer than your common King Arthur Excalibur sword prop used in movies thats shown being use two handed in stuff like First Knight.... Basically it resembles the typical barbarian sword associated with the Arnold Schwarzenegger Conan movies (much smaller than great sword class like Zweihander in google image search I just did now but longer than the one used in the 1981 Excalibur film) cut a katana in half that was laid on two separate stands with nothing but air below at the center where it got cracked apart...........

The way he uses this testing he saw at the public San Diego Convention in a historical event already makes me raise eyebrows because......... Katanas are a different class from whats often classed as claymores in video games like Diablo and the giant Montante looking greatswords in same said games. Even said video games teat them as such..... So to use it as an example of how European swords are superior to Japanese swords is already a claim showing a disregard for common sense just by this fact...... Especially when the Japanese themselves saw it this way and the Samurai not only had much larger sword classifications but also smaller ones as well and emphasized if you want to fight against heavily armored opponents yo use something like the Nodachi and the Zanbato if you decide not to use pikes, hammers, and halberds.

I saw the poster dismiss this conterfact as well ss another response by another poster saying that even in the katana category, not all swords are equal and the best katanas basically use Chinese steel which can be comparable to European steel and later on actually imported steel from Europe around the same time they started getting musket weaponry to equip their most elite warriors. Again the guy who believes the longsswor dcutting the katana in half dismiss these claims and basically repeated over and over in a broken record that Europeans words are superior because he saw a the demonstration.......

But this does make me wonder about one thing? If a sword made out of pig iron or some other horrible metals like bronze was constructed to be a large blade say for this argument the size of a thats over 10 lbs such as the Chinese Zhanmadao design, would it still get damaged heavily by a generic smaller one handed arming sword because of the difference in metal quality? Or would the weight and size of a sword made out of the very crappy pig iron so common in Japan make up for it and actually damage the steel forced arming sword? Esp since example the Zhanmadao which was not only allegedly a an anti-cavalry weapon but there are tales of it literally cutting a giant horse's head off while its charging in full speed and even cutting a large front of the horses body in half up to around down in between the front legs?

I saw a video where Matt Easton emphasizes at all cost against hammers, axes, and other weapons to not parry and block and deflect but just side step or back away or dodge against them if you weapon is a lighter one like the First Knight Lancelot blade.... and it reminds me of an something I once read in Samurai training about doing the exact same thing against wooden training mallets and against a suburito which are made out of wood and are specialized advaned training equipment even if you are using dulled katana blades made out of modern day quality steel you're better off making footwork and avoidance your defensive moves rather than direct sword contact stuff like binding and deflection because the weight of the suburito wooden sword.

So I really ask based on all these mismatched and often apples and oranges comparisons, is metal quality really the sole factor in the battle of sword durability in battle esp prolonged clashes as all the katana vs Europeans words love to point out about pig iron crap? Or if someone forged a Zweihander class sword using bronze which is often stigmatized as being far inferior to steel and iron, would a bronze greatsword actually be the one doing some impactful hits on a smaller sword made out of the best steel like say a Napoleonic saber that visible damage will eventually take place and you who wields the lighter weapon should be worried?

So I wanna add camo to the blade of my sword but how should I do that? I have no idea if there is a specific way to do it

Hey! I'm trying to write a fantasy book where the main 7 characters each have a distinct medieval style weapon, but I'm struggling on deciding what type of weapons would work well, can anyone help me? I have decided on 7 weapons, but I'm not happy with how short range most weapons are and I feel like they're maybe all a bit too similar in fighting style. One thing that I do feel is important plot wise is that there's an aspect of the weapon that always stays with the wielder, so like a bow and arrow works, but a spear doesn't really. These are the 7 I have at the moment: a strength focussed sword (was thinking a two handed long sword, but with more research it might be too similar to the rapier), a dexterity focussed sword (was thinking a rapier, but same as before), a bow and arrow, an axe, a chain whip, a slingshot and a mace. I especially would like to have more far range weapons, but I would like them to remain mobile and like I said before, have the characters keep some part of the weapon, any suggestions?

I want a 2-knuck with the sides extended out enough to get a grip with 1st and 4th fingers, and with a fatter rounded part in your palm, like a hotdog, to spread the impact in my palm over a larger area.

Everything I find is as thin in your palm as the protruding knucks.

Below, I've padded the palm.

I've hit trees with this and it would be devastating against someone's face, chest, or back.

https://preview.redd.it/eujwju1lkwpc1.jpg?width=327&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d6eb7f277303d9a96b8f080f6a94449d9857a2bb

This vid is what I'm referring to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRzc--zUjsk

Its 6 minutes so if you haven't seen it yet I advise you to do so to get the context of this post.

Now I was dong a friendly sparring with a scutum and rubber foam Gladius with a weight and feel similar to the real thing but designed in a way that it doesn't really send out hard hits when you get whacked by it especially if you wear protective gear which we both were.

Now I'll openly state out I never learned proper sword training before though I have held replicas of real weapons with similar weight and designs tot he real thing. Even wielded actual blades that can cut and stab to cause wounds at Renaissance fares and in dojos. So I'm not the best person to seek advise from.

However in our friendly "light whack" "light stab" play fighting (yes even with foam weapons and authentic protective gear we decided to be safe and just horseplay around), I noticed something. As my friend was whacking my scutum I felt secure enough to push in close enough that my rfoam gladius was close enough that if we were horseplaying with just our fists, I'd be able to do an uppercut to his stomach.

In fact I began to approach my friend with the shield in front of me like I'm an invincible tank and while he's flailing and poking at me I simply do a semi talk to push his weapon away and then rush straight at him like a football player except witha s shield in front of me. He instincitvely backs away and you cans ee panick in his face every time I do this. I don't simply just walk towards him, I speed up for an instant confident my shield is protecting me and close in enough to poke his upper body ranging from chest to down tot he stomach.

Now I noticed during our horseplay if I try to do thrusts faroma far distance, it indeed does feel awkward like Skallagram states and even outright hurts as my wrist gets bent in an in appropriate way while my hand is gripping the hilt but its stuck to grip in a hammer holding manner by default because of the hilt's design. So when I was watching Skallagram's video the first time days ago I immediately recognized what he meant about the wrong grip hurting you and my hand was doing the exact same hing as he was showing as incorrect because I was literally doing that because of the way the gladius forces you to hold a blade........

However I immediately had in my head the moment Skallagram brings up the Gladius specifically the though of "if he had tried using a Gladius with a shield and sparred a few hours, he'd know not only how to stab properly with it but why the Gladius was designed with that kind of grip". I already have an assumed theory that I think is completely correct and answers Skallagram's question at the end of the vid. But as I said I lack actual training with weapons which is why I am posting here because I want input of veterans in this subject. OK here goes.

The Gladius was designed to be at extremely close quarters. To be specific its meant to be used in the same range at which two boxers exchange punches at each other. So there's really no need to learn how to change grip and hold it in more precise manners because its meant to be a close weapon. And as with waht I seen w playing with the scutum, the shield basically protects you from other longer blades and allows you to quickly rush in for the kill with the Gladius. So over-extended thrusts similar to longswords and rapiers isn't really meant to be done with the Gladius because you're meant to close in and the a brute first stabs at exposed areas in the body.

If anything the grip of the Gladius which Skallagram criticizes int he vid and calls it unusual, citing that it prevents safethrusting technique actually was designed for safety! Because as we spared one thing I notice witht he Gladius is that as long as you come close for the stab, it is impossible to lose grip of the sword just by sloppy technique alone. The way the hilt with its large top guard and the ball at the bottom actually is designed to force you to hold it as a hammer grip. So you don't drop it as your fist is tightly clenched on the weapon while you do repeated thrusting. So it actually is a safety measure for the range at which a Gladius is supposed to be used. Not just that it optmizes effective stabbing and thrusting. Because A few times I unintentionally thrusted harder than warranted in friendly playing and while we were wearing full protection, my friend told me a few times He really felt my stabs and if it wasn't for the metals mixed in with softpadding and plastic underneath these replicase, he would have felt like he got punched , probably with a few bruises. The hammer grip the sword's hilt forces really does subconsciously make you stab in such a way that it'll be easy to penetrate someone's muscles possibly bons even if you have no training is what I got from using the foam items similar in feel to a Gladius.

Last but not least and quite heavily related to all that I said earlier.......... Roaen warfare was fought in square rectangular formation in interlocked shields. Just by this fact alone you're not gonna have the chance to really do a long thrust rapier style. In these tight formations you're pretty much gonna be locked ina tight space so pretty much the enemy barbarians who can't kill you because of the scutum's size and in tandem with the rectangular shield wall, will at some point find himself closing in on you..... Well guess who's gonna find himself with holes in his stomach? And quite releated once the Roman legion goes ont he offensive, you're talking about a primitive moving tank. As they start steamrolling over the disorganized barbarians, just like in my horseplaying, it begins to bake sense why you need a hammer grip as you're closing in poking out exits for blood spillage as you get near enough to punch them except you're doing it with a deadly sword.

So it all makes sense and I think this should answer Skallagram's question. If I knew how to make videos I'd even send a response video (unfortunately I don't know anything behind film making).

Just one more note from what I send from authors, sparing sessions between Roman soldiers and known accounts between a Legatus (Roman generals) and barbarian chieftains even a few famous Gladiator events, often the outcome decided by effective use of the shield and getting the enemy into close range. You'll find the winner does moves to knock the shield away and then runs in to get close enough for punching range and kills the opponent. Or lets the opponent attacks nonstop and using the scutum for stonewall defense until the enemy gets fatigued or makes a mistake in his barrage that leaves and opening. To get close in at punching or even clinching range and then do the lethal stabs. Sometimes not even blocking with the shield at all but simply stepping backwards or circling the enemy to get him frustrated until that vulnerable moment where you can get in to send a punch but with a sword that kills him instead of KO. Without a shield? I seen an account of a centurion literally grabbing a barbarian champions arm, pulling him in for a clinch and then stabbing himg.

Well thats my personal hot take based on my horseplaying experience and Wikipedia level reading into the subject. So whats your thoughts? What response do you personally give to Skallagram about his confusion near the end of the vid? Is his question stemming from not understand the nature of the Gladius (which is my presumption right now)?