2. Do NOT Google a "yuri" bow at work with the safe search off.
Things you wish you could tell your past self.
|
Between the kanabo, naginata, yuri and yumi bow the samurai had a variety of really good weapons they could use quite effectively on the battlefield.
Then they had the katana, which was basically there for the symbolism, duels and executing prisoners.
Personally, I think comparing them to bastard swords is an insult to bastard swords.
Things I have learned from this thread:
1. My hatred of katanas is completely justified, but there are way cooler Japanese weapons that sadly are not getting their due.
2. Do NOT Google a "yuri" bow at work with the safe search off.
There certainly are plenty of awesome Japanese weapons that are way more effective in actual combat than the katana
Sorry about the typo, meant to write "yari", which is a polearm with a fairly long double edged blade at the end.
2. Do NOT Google a "yuri" bow at work with the safe search off.
Similarly when I've posted some Japanese words for explanations here, I'm forced to insert a dash to prevent this boards "dirty word" mechanism just so I can spell a word correctly and not get auto-editted for using it. Like ji-zamurai (farmer samurai, the lowest class of samurai) or the famous warrior and Japanese general, Yoshi-tsune, brother of the first reigning Shogun of Japan. (Neither word should require a dash in them, but I can't post them accurately if I don't).
In the end Pathfinder katana is about as realistic as the real-world fireball spell (!?), but they're fun fluff for a fantasy game and to fit some game concepts, and that's all that matters.
It seems to me that the only people who really care about how the katana works in game are the haters and the fanboys (both I consider with equal disdain) - for the rest of us, its an oddity and little more, and may fit some character concepts.
Well, the ''art'' of doing Katana stopped to develop in 1600, while the cavalry sabre was still in use in battle until the XX century.
That's a very good point. And its true with many things of Tokugawa Era Japan, basically the government wanted to maintain status quo on everything including the advancement of technology - they basically forced technology to stop. Not only did their technology of sword making stop in 1600, but consider that the Portuguese brought the arquebus to Japan which it adopted to use, but was still in use (unimproved) in 1867 (over 250 years later), when America forced Japan to open its borders to the outside world. Trying to compare a feudal katana with the modern 19th/20th century sabre, is like comparing an arquebus with a Springfield rifle. Modern steel and much higher quality metal makes a huge difference in combat capability to something used elsewhere 250 years before - its no true comparison.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If straight swords are better for fencing explain why the saber and cutlass supplanted straight swords for nearly every army and navy in Europe for centuries.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but another consideration is by the time sabre and cutlass preimminence in Europe, armor, except for some breast plate, pretty disappeared prior to it. I believe gun technology had more to do with that, than the improved blades of the same era. Anachronistic weapon comparisons, when you take into consideraton of the rest of the world's combat technologies, and not just isolated comparisons, just doesn't work for many, many reasons.
If straight swords are better for fencing explain why the saber and cutlass supplanted straight swords for nearly every army and navy in Europe for centuries.I'm not disagreeing with you, but another consideration is by the time sabre and cutlass preimminence in Europe, armor, except for some breast plate, pretty disappeared prior to it. I believe gun technology had more to do with that, than the improved blades of the same era. Anachronistic weapon comparisons, when you take into consideraton of the rest of the world's combat technologies, and not just isolated comparisons, just don't work for many, many reasons.
Ninja'd
If straight swords are better for fencing explain why the saber and cutlass supplanted straight swords for nearly every army and navy in Europe for centuries.
Because no soldier or sailor should be "fencing." The Greek hoplites knew that....
If you're in a one-on-one duel, either you're in the wrong spot, your opponent is in the wrong spot, or, more likely, both.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Khopesh are a Bronze Age weapon, and fell into disuse very quickly, relatively speaking. They are a symbolic Egyptian weapon, but they suck in a duel and are lousy in tight quarters. Falcata are merely axe equivalents that didn't work as well, and were harder to make. As armor got better and better, they also fell into disuse, because axes are better at penetrating armor, and straight swords better for fencing/swordsmanship. I'm not saying they aren't lethally effective...it's just they are a combination weapon that didn't do either of the jobs of a sword or axe better then those.The khopesh fell out of use because they're a complex shape that's hard to make out of a material that can't be cast. They have the thin, curved cutting edge of a scimitar, a point in line with the hilt like a spatha, and a hook on the back edge for pulling shields out of position.
If straight swords are better for fencing explain why the saber and cutlass supplanted straight swords for nearly every army and navy in Europe for centuries.
As noted above, armor.
Curving swords are less effective against metal armor, piercing is more effective.
When you say 'centuries', I assume you mean the most recent few, where guns made armor obsolete, and curving swords came back into their own.
Curving swords are particularly well liked by cavalry because it caters to the ride-by superslash, and hacking down at foes. They aren't as well liked by footmen.
The spatha is, of course, a straight sword, and used far more on the lunge then hacking. Its designed for close use in tight formations after people have penetrated a shield wall.
And when I say 'fencing', I really mean, contests of sword to sword in any aspect, not just modern style. The straight sword definitely is more flexible in such contests then the curved, particularly if there is armor involved.
==Aelryinth
|
Because cavalry used swords for war and combat, not the social sport of fencing.
If straight swords are better for fencing explain why the saber and cutlass supplanted straight swords for nearly every army and navy in Europe for centuries.
Also... they didn't. Most heavy cavalry still used a straight sword in the Napoleonic Wars - such as the pattern 1796 Heavy Cavalry Sword - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1796_Heavy_Cavalry_Sword . It was light cavalry who used a lighter curved sword.
Also... they didn't. Most heavy cavalry still used a straight sword in the Napoleonic Wars - such as the pattern 1796 Heavy Cavalry Sword - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1796_Heavy_Cavalry_Sword . It was light cavalry who used a lighter curved sword.Because cavalry used swords for war and combat, not the social sport of fencing.
If straight swords are better for fencing explain why the saber and cutlass supplanted straight swords for nearly every army and navy in Europe for centuries.
Ahh, I like that sword. No nonsense. Do I detect an Eastern European influence in the grip?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nope...What does this have to do with katanasSee, my grampa told me once that when he was fightin to clear the Japanese off one of them islands his squad set up a machine gun emplacement. They laid down some suppressin fire, and not but ten seconds after they stopped firin, up comes this guy with a sword, and slices clean through the machine gun barrel.
A course they shot him dead, but my grampa was real impressed.
Thus the "tall tale told by my grandfather" presentation. Using satire or sarcasm with a straight delivery is kind of my thing.
If straight swords are better for fencing explain why the saber and cutlass supplanted straight swords for nearly every army and navy in Europe for centuries.Because no soldier or sailor should be "fencing." The Greek hoplites knew that....
If you're in a one-on-one duel, either you're in the wrong spot, your opponent is in the wrong spot, or, more likely, both.
also @ the navy, cutlasses and sabers had a shorter reach making them easier to swing around on deck, plus they had the heavy head allowing them to cut rope quickly.
anyway wasn't the Katana (and other Japanese curved blades) selling point that they had a convex edge allowing them to cut more cleanly and with more follow through? it made them keep their edge longer as well.
Curved blades SLICE better. That's a function of design.
And no, they don't keep their edge 'better', but the layered steel does allow them to be honed extremely sharp, hence my Crusader/scimitar/longsword example above. However, sharp edges get mangled easily, and naturally enough re-honing them grinds away more metal and eventually leaves you with an unusable sword.
Side note: Sword polishing in Japan is a VERY exacting art, because the antique swords have been polished so many times they are literally wearing away.
But all that is, is soft tissue relevant. Put them up against metal armor, and the edge doesn't matter, and the wedge shape gets stuck very easily. Yeah, they can carve meat like nobody's business. Iron and steel, bit more of a problem.
==Aelryinth
But Katanas are NOT straight swords like bastard swords, they're curved weapons, what you spent your entire post extolling.Because cavalry used swords for war and combat, not the social sport of fencing.
If straight swords are better for fencing explain why the saber and cutlass supplanted straight swords for nearly every army and navy in Europe for centuries.
Also see above, but not all cavalry used sabres, a lot used straight swords, sometimes changing back and forth year to year as different ideas where tested and discarded. Read Swordsmen Of the British Empire, or Blades of the British Empire (both by D A kinglsey, with forewords by Matt Easton in some editions), if you really want a good overview, with AAR from the time on the battles fought and weapons used in hand to hand fighting. For instance it was not uncommon for a British Army Officer in Europe to use a straight sword, (or spadroon) but upon being stationed to India re-equip himself with a curved blade, only to return to the sword if stationed back to europe, or to a different colony, sword for the task, and a curved blade works damn well, in vertain situations, as does a long, thin straight blade, or a short broad straight blade, or a recurve shape or...
On topic to the main point: To me a Katana is a type of bastard sword, or messer for all intents and purposes, make a Katana out of crucible steel, and a messer or Longsword out of the same quality of steel, sharpen them both to a combat edge, and test them. It has been done, more than once, the differences are less than the differences between a Viking sword and an Arming sword.
True, different kettle of fish, but the numbers struck me as good enough, because the katana is not a no dachi or greatsword, so d10 slashing 19-20 always made sense to me. As for being a light weapon in pf, they aren't actually that light but were meant to be a cavalry sword bigger and heavier than something like a scimitar or light sabre (which are actually quick, light one-handed weapons).
I think the tachi (before the katana) is a better cav weapon, got a wicked curve to it, the curve even going through into the handle. They look cooler (but the curve of katanas can vary a great deal).
Which brings me to my next point. Katanas can be straight. Yep, can happen, search "straight katana".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The oldest katanas were all straight pattern. The curve happened as they refined their metallurgy with a soft backbone to the harder steel of the edge. The difference in metal made the weapon curve during the cooling process.
It's also why katanas are known as famously fragile and brittle in certain ways - the stress of bending during the cooling process, instead of actually being forged curved, puts internal stress fractures on the metal (i.e. 'splits'). Hitting the blade on the side along those stress fractures with, say, a steel pipe, can snap it fairly easily.
Most curved blades are FORGED curved, so that issue isn't there.
Straight swords have the soft stuff more towards the middle of the weapon, so, no curving.
==Aelryinth
Curved blades SLICE better. That's a function of design.
And no, they don't keep their edge 'better', but the layered steel does allow them to be honed extremely sharp, hence my Crusader/scimitar/longsword example above. However, sharp edges get mangled easily, and naturally enough re-honing them grinds away more metal and eventually leaves you with an unusable sword.
Side note: Sword polishing in Japan is a VERY exacting art, because the antique swords have been polished so many times they are literally wearing away.
But all that is, is soft tissue relevant. Put them up against metal armor, and the edge doesn't matter, and the wedge shape gets stuck very easily. Yeah, they can carve meat like nobody's business. Iron and steel, bit more of a problem.
==Aelryinth
And without the bashing power and durability of say European hand and a half swords or being a curved chopper like the falchion made to counter mail, or with crazy thrusting potential like a tuck/estoc or Spanish conquistadore heavy rapier.
No wonder they took to firearms so readily and pike formations for melee.
The oldest katanas were all straight pattern. The curve happened as they refined their metallurgy with a soft backbone to the harder steel of the edge. The difference in metal made the weapon curve during the cooling process.
Straight swords have the soft stuff more towards the middle of the weapon, so, no curving.
==Aelryinth
That's all well and good. But I'm very sure that an authoritaian history of swordmaking was pretty far down on the totem pole of priorities.
Katanas in the game are curved blades. Why? because that's the cultural expectation that's been drilled into us in decades of television, movies, and anime. The fact that a fair amount of what Paizo makes for weapons and armor is grounded in history is mostly icing on the cake.
I'm not sure the point of this debate. If your sole argument is that other things are numerically superior, I don't think anyone is contesting that argument. Although in some cases the notion of "superior" is more of a preference for a certain gaming style over another.
If on the other hand someone's contention, that the only valid choice for a player character should be the most numerically superior item for each slot, and to choose anything other is badwrongfun, that person and I are essentially shouting across a gulf which has no bridge.
Basically this.
This thread was going so well until that guy got here. -> http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/katanas-are-underpowered-in-d20
Curved blades SLICE better. That's a function of design.
And no, they don't keep their edge 'better', but the layered steel does allow them to be honed extremely sharp, hence my Crusader/scimitar/longsword example above. However, sharp edges get mangled easily, and naturally enough re-honing them grinds away more metal and eventually leaves you with an unusable sword.
but the Edge of a Katana is thicker than the edge of european swords, and just as sharp, hence it's longer lasting edge. Also wasn't the Katana's flexibility hat allowed it to stab into armor? The sword got through armored opponents by stabbing, and unarmored ones with slashing. the flexibility allowed it to slide between metal plates.
though once again this is all Japanese curved weapons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No wonder they took to firearms so readily and pike formations for melee.
Pike formations ruled almost all of history... Every period had someone doing crazy stuff with pike formations.
Curved blades SLICE better. That's a function of design.
And no, they don't keep their edge 'better', but the layered steel does allow them to be honed extremely sharp, hence my Crusader/scimitar/longsword example above. However, sharp edges get mangled easily, and naturally enough re-honing them grinds away more metal and eventually leaves you with an unusable sword.
but the Edge of a Katana is thicker than the edge of european swords, and just as sharp, hence it's longer lasting edge. Also wasn't the Katana's flexibility hat allowed it to stab into armor? The sword got through armored opponents by stabbing, and unarmored ones with slashing. the flexibility allowed it to slide between metal plates.
though once again this is all Japanese curved weapons.
You don't get to bring up how the blade is thicker than European weaponry in one breath, then explain how wonderfully flexible that thick blade is, in the next.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did you notice how none of those examples are from Pathfinder?Some people seem to miss the point of the modeling of weapon in Pathfinder: it's to make possible some typical character, not to relfect reality. Does an archer can shoot 1 arrow per second at 35 feets in real life? No, but we had some archer in litterature that could do it (Legolas, I'm looking at you). Can you reload a crossbow/ a musket in a few seconds? No. Heck, can you fight with a double-flail? Lol no.
It's the same thing with the Katana: was it a great weapon? No. But a lot of character out there use it with style, be it Morpheus who cut a car in 2, Blade, Kill Bill or anything straight from Japan. In that case, the goal of the rule set for the Katana is not realism, but to reflect how it is use in media to let player do it. And in media, it's a type of bastard sword that can cut anything.
And your point is? I could say that the Dwarf from Pathfinder are, in fact, from Tolkien, that the Elf are also (with minor change) from Tolkien...
Edit: and don't forget: Pathfinder is a set of rule, Golarion is the setting. Pathfinder should not give you ''example'', it sould give you rule set to create character.
Clearly never read The Lord of the Rings.
Curved blades SLICE better. That's a function of design.
And no, they don't keep their edge 'better', but the layered steel does allow them to be honed extremely sharp, hence my Crusader/scimitar/longsword example above. However, sharp edges get mangled easily, and naturally enough re-honing them grinds away more metal and eventually leaves you with an unusable sword.
but the Edge of a Katana is thicker than the edge of european swords, and just as sharp, hence it's longer lasting edge. Also wasn't the Katana's flexibility hat allowed it to stab into armor? The sword got through armored opponents by stabbing, and unarmored ones with slashing. the flexibility allowed it to slide between metal plates.
though once again this is all Japanese curved weapons.
You don't get to bring up how the blade is thicker than European weaponry in one breath, then explain how wonderfully flexible that thick blade is, in the next.
the edge is thicker, it's convex, or curves inward, a European blade is convex is curves outward. This gives the Katana(read as all Japanese curved blades) a more Wedge shaped edge that pushes the material away as it cuts. The European edge while sharp and thin on the edge gets wider quickly and thus the material catches on the concave area.
Katanas and Japanese blades are D shaped. Most other blades around the world are A-C shaped.
This is because the blade is heat treated with clay protecting the back end, it stays malleable and doesn't expand. This stretches the blade giving it the D shape and pulls the blade back giving it the curve. The back end is malleable and thus makes the core and brace of the sword bendy, while the edge stays hard against strikes and when cutting. Because this is due to heat tempering and not by design Japanese Curve blades are more durable or at least less prone to shattering, because the shape is done consistently.
it makes the edge less prone to bending as well.
Pike formations ruled almost all of history... Every period had someone doing crazy stuff with pike formations.
No wonder they took to firearms so readily and pike formations for melee.
Yeah, a well-disciplined pike/spear formation was just about always the best form of melee infantry you could get.
I am reminded of Tercios, brilliant for a long time.
But the Roman maniple managed to defeat the Greek phalanx. Course the maniples and then cohorts managed to defeat a lot of peoples. Very interesting the pike came back later.
On katanas, yes they can thrust, as can other swords, some of them more focused on the thrust.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, a well-disciplined pike/spear formation was just about always the best form of melee infantry you could get.Pike formations ruled almost all of history... Every period had someone doing crazy stuff with pike formations.
No wonder they took to firearms so readily and pike formations for melee.
Well - it was very much a rock/paper/scissors. Pikes of some sort were always a solid paper vs the cavalry rock in that combo. Weak vs flanking (one reason spear formations were so useful in Greece - mountainous terrain makes flanking hard) so they had trouble vs more loose formation style infantry (how the Romans beat them... the 2nd time - first time they tried to out frontal assault them and failed horribly) and the longer two-handed pikes were weak vs archers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am reminded of Tercios, brilliant for a long time.
But the Roman maniple managed to defeat the Greek phalanx. Course the maniples and then cohorts managed to defeat a lot of peoples. Very interesting the pike came back later.
On katanas, yes they can thrust, as can other swords, some of them more focused on the thrust.
they came back because they were great, the Roman's Infantry however were set up well to counter it however and were more heavily trained. The Romans had more Soldiers by profession.
Well - it was very much a rock/paper/scissors. Pikes of some sort were always a solid paper vs the cavalry rock in that combo. Weak vs flanking (one reason spear formations were so useful in Greece - mountainous terrain makes flanking hard) so they had trouble vs more loose formation style infantry (how the Romans beat them... the 2nd time - first time they tried to out frontal assault them and failed horribly) and the longer two-handed pikes were weak vs archers.Yeah, a well-disciplined pike/spear formation was just about always the best form of melee infantry you could get.Pike formations ruled almost all of history... Every period had someone doing crazy stuff with pike formations.
No wonder they took to firearms so readily and pike formations for melee.
this isn't actually all that true, Pikes are just great because you can get a huge distance between you and the opponent. if you have a loose or mobile pike infantry they can counter loose infantry quite well, as well as more concentrated infantry. the Weapon is whole sale more advantageous than the sword. Especially when you have rows to set up. the pike also favors fighting on your terms, and thus is better for defense.
But all that is, is soft tissue relevant. Put them up against metal armor, and the edge doesn't matter, and the wedge shape gets stuck very easily. Yeah, they can carve meat like nobody's business. Iron and steel, bit more of a problem.
==Aelryinth
Hell, put them against bone and they are often in trouble too.
From what I've heard, when doing work that was intensive on the blade, such as cutting off a head (a common practice either to identify and confirm the death of enemy leaders, or just as a method of confirming your kills in battle), it was traditional to use the wakizashi instead of the main sword.
Since it was shorter, it was easier and cheaper to forge. So it was less of a problem if it got chipped.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Curved blades SLICE better. That's a function of design.
And no, they don't keep their edge 'better', but the layered steel does allow them to be honed extremely sharp, hence my Crusader/scimitar/longsword example above. However, sharp edges get mangled easily, and naturally enough re-honing them grinds away more metal and eventually leaves you with an unusable sword.
but the Edge of a Katana is thicker than the edge of european swords, and just as sharp, hence it's longer lasting edge. Also wasn't the Katana's flexibility hat allowed it to stab into armor? The sword got through armored opponents by stabbing, and unarmored ones with slashing. the flexibility allowed it to slide between metal plates.
though once again this is all Japanese curved weapons.
You don't get to bring up how the blade is thicker than European weaponry in one breath, then explain how wonderfully flexible that thick blade is, in the next.
the edge is thicker, it's convex, or curves inward, a European blade is convex is curves outward. This gives the Katana(read as all Japanese curved blades) a more Wedge shaped edge that pushes the material away as it cuts. The European edge while sharp and thin on the edge gets wider quickly and thus the material catches on the concave area.
Katanas and Japanese blades are D shaped. Most other blades around the world are A-C shaped.
This is because the blade is heat treated with clay protecting the back end, it stays malleable and doesn't expand. This stretches the blade giving it the D shape and pulls the blade back giving it the curve. The back end is malleable and thus makes the core and brace of the sword bendy, while the edge stays hard against strikes and when cutting. Because this is due to heat tempering and not by design Japanese Curve blades are more durable or at least less prone to shattering,...
YOu probably want to stay away from the convex/concave terminology, because it is misleading as to what you mean.
The katana's flexibility comes from its backbone. It can take a hit against the blade, which will probably chip, but won't warp as the backbone absorbs the recoil and stays intact.
However, they have none of the renowned lateral flexibility of, say, Spanish steel, which could be bent 180 degrees and still not break. Hitting a katana from the side is a good way to hit the stress fracture points from its bending and shatter it. You can do it with a good blow from a metal pipe.
Likewise, smashing it on the backside will bend and warp the soft backbone of the weapon, and immediately render it unusuable.
The traditional low budget protection against slicking attacks is mail or strips of metal. Sword flexibility has nothing to do with such...the katana is not a flexible sword that way, it's actually rather brittle.
Yes, faced with plate armor, you want a hacking or pounding weapon to deform the plates. OR, you want a straight sword that can thrust more easily. Wedge shaped cross sections will get stuck in the metal, while rounded ones will pull out more easily. Wedge shape works wonderful for slicing meat and soft tissue. It has problems with stuff that's actually solid, not the least of which is the thinner blade chips and cracks far more easily.
To sum it up: The katana is NOT a tough sword. There's been many tests comparing the design against European swords, and in pretty much all cases the katana breaks, bends, deforms, chips and shatters far, far more easily then a Western blade.
What the katana does better is slice meat. It's a great weapon for slaughtering people who are wearing leather or less armor.
Its lack of a guard makes it a poor weapon for a duel. It makes it a great weapon for a quick draw, however.
The katana is a revered weapon and the symbol of Japan, and they've maintained the martial traditions surrounding it for hundreds of years in the face of far more useful and advanced weapons. In Europe, the martial knowledge faded into obscurity and is only now making a comeback in the face of the advent of superior weapons.
That does not make it a superior sword.
===Aelryinth
So taking into account that pathfinder works off the assumption that standard steel is the same regardless of where it's from, would the katana have been invented at all in Tian Xia?
Since from what I've read it seems like the katana only came about due to lack of both quantity and quality in iron.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am reminded of Tercios, brilliant for a long time.
But the Roman maniple managed to defeat the Greek phalanx. Course the maniples and then cohorts managed to defeat a lot of peoples. Very interesting the pike came back later.
On katanas, yes they can thrust, as can other swords, some of them more focused on the thrust.
I believe one of the reasons for that is the Romans used square, interlocking shields, and had shorter blades for use in the press. The Greeks used round shields that didn't interlock as well, and longer swords that were more hampered in tight quarters.
A great number of Roman tactics were taken directly from the Greeks. It is noteworthy that the Romans considered themselves and the Greeks to be the only civilized nations on the planet, to the point of wholly conscripting the entire Greek Pantheon of Gods.
==Aelryinth
once again, by "katana" i'm saying all Japanese curved swords in general.
Longer blades like Nodachi are more flexible for instance, simply due to their size. and are made for stabbing, and the Japanese armor being like studded leather. it would pierce well against charges and has to be flexible to not deform.
and while the blade isn't as flexible as spanish swords as you say, it WAS capable of fitting between the plates in Studded leather/silk.
likewise the Katana's lack of toughness usually comes from Japanese poor quality ore, not by design. Hammer welding is the strongest bond you can get in a metal and so the folding process on quality steel probably would yield better results.
Katanas were never used against plate mail and as such there is no reason to compare to weapons designed to fight heavier armor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A great number of Roman tactics were taken directly from the Greeks. It is noteworthy that the Romans considered themselves and the Greeks to be the only civilized nations on the planet, to the point of wholly conscripting the entire Greek Pantheon of Gods.
==Aelryinth
Most Roman tactics were borrowed from somebody else (turtle formation was Celtic), as well as most Roman weapons (gladius and scutum borrowed from Celtiberians) - Romans did it better and more efficiently, but they almost invented nothing on the battlefield.
No, the lack of toughness is from the design.
Most curved swords are forged with the curve. In Japanese style, the curve happens during the cooling process as the sword bends to the traditional shape because of the different ratios of iron in the backbone vs the blade.
This sets up internal stress patterns inside the metal that are vulnerable to side pressure. Likewise, the backside is 'soft', and will deform far more readily then hard edge, which will instead chip.
The whole process of the katana is designed BECAUSE the metal is crappy. It had to be folded and beat JUST to remove the impurities from the steel. So you did end up with decent metal, if not the quality level of the West.
But the problems with the katana are from the design, do NOT blame just the metal.
And I'm not at all sure what 'flexibility' has to do with being able to get into gaps in armor. That's just a skill, and has nothing to do with the sword itself. That hard, killing edge means the swords breaks before it really bends.
==Aelryinth
Obviously yes, since IT WAS. The reasons may have been different but the fact that the weapon exists, came from there, pretty much says it was.So taking into account that pathfinder works off the assumption that standard steel is the same regardless of where it's from, would the katana have been invented at all in Tian Xia?
Well yes, that's a given, but I'm guessing the katana was added more for the coolness factor rather than it being developed naturally from the needs and lacks of the continent.
What I'm saying is, given that Tian Xia has the same quality steel as everywhere else, would they have actually developed the katana, or would they've instead gone to the longsword?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lone Wolf and Cub, the old manga series, has a couple of examples of the weaknesses of Katanas.
One was a duel against another samurai, where they had to cut off the heads of small stone idols, a set number, before they could attack the enemy.
Someone heard about the duel and attached iron rings around the statues' necks. The katana of the challenger hit one of the iron rings and snapped just before the killing strike as it did so.
Just before the final fight of the manga, one of the enemy agents, disguised as a sword polisher, comes out and convinces Daigordo to let him polish Lone Wolf's sword. He strikes it once near the hilt with a small hammer, seemingly doing nothing, but because of that strike, it breaks during the duel with the end boss.
There was also a clear difference between a courtly katana built for speed draws and dueling, and a heavier katana meant for war and manchopping. Lone Wolf used the latter.
==Aelryinth
|
|
Katanas were never used against plate mail and as such there is no reason to compare to weapons designed to fight heavier armor.
It matters because we're talking about how good they should be in the context of Pathfinder - and in Pathfinder they DO have to go up against plate mail.
And of course - that's one reason why they were designed that way. If you look at the development of armor in different areas of the world - weapons always shift to compensate. Perhaps the most striking (pun intended) example is the warhammer - a mediocre weapon against unarmored targets - but could puncture plate/chain-mail. In Japan they never had chain-mail or anything like European plate - so there was no reason for swords to focus on much besides slicing meat - which katanas do very well.
Since my Kaidan setting of Japanese horror isn't Minkai, and not in Golarian, it has the same deficient metals in low supply as Japan, thus katana being invented there, makes sense.
No, the lack of toughness is from the design.
Most curved swords are forged with the curve. In Japanese style, the curve happens during the cooling process as the sword bends to the traditional shape because of the different ratios of iron in the backbone vs the blade.
This sets up internal stress patterns inside the metal that are vulnerable to side pressure. Likewise, the backside is 'soft', and will deform far more readily then hard edge, which will instead chip.
The whole process of the katana is designed BECAUSE the metal is crappy. It had to be folded and beat JUST to remove the impurities from the steel. So you did end up with decent metal, if not the quality level of the West.
But the problems with the katana are from the design, do NOT blame just the metal.
And I'm not at all sure what 'flexibility' has to do with being able to get into gaps in armor. That's just a skill, and has nothing to do with the sword itself. That hard, killing edge means the swords breaks before it really bends.
==Aelryinth
the stress patterns would cause it to be weak from lateral stress but it deals with thrusts and hits on the edge fairly well, it isn;t due to metal quality either. it's because the back edge is protected by clay when it's tempered in the fire, because of this the blade tempers unevenly giving it the curve shaped and the special edge shape.
to put it planely the metal is folded and forged via the folding to reduce the metal impurity, this gives it the strongest metal bond capable, an impact weld. Welds tend to be stronger than the surrounding metal(when hulls break on ships they actually tear up to the weld and then follow along it's side) this gives it great strength along the weld pattern, which is toward the edge to the back, and toward the hilt and to the tip. The sword bends and can warp from the side due to the exposed non-tempered steel, most swords are completely tempered around the surface making them resist bending from all directions.(to be clear, most swords are made this way, The Japanese simply do it more to overcome the iron impurities)
This gives the blade strength on the thrust and slashing motions and make it better to guard along the edge and deflect the attack away along the curve(there is no hilt but you should deflect attacks toward the end of the sword as this is how it's both strongest and how the curve gives you an edge).
the flexibility means that when it hits a plate in studded leather, the blade deflects and bends into the gaps between the plates. which was a much more common armor in Japan and even Europe I think.