Why isn't the longsword a monk weapon?

[swoosh]

I might just be crazy but I see a lot more straight swords (usually with fancy tassels on the end) in kung fu or other similar movies than most of the weapons on the monk list.

And yet it's really hard to build a monk that can actually wield one effectively.

But you can totally make it work with a seven branched sword or a tripoint double edged sword. The first of those is a damn ornament and the second doesn't even to appear to be a real thing that actually exists.

[Kahel Stormbender]

Because the long sword is based on the ENGLISH long sword. Can't think of the name off hand, but the sword you're thinking of isn't a long sword. I'm tempted to say it's a tian, but I could easily be wrong. Think Pathfinder refers to it as a temple sword though.

[StabbittyDoom]

You won't find any balance-related answer. If you want a longsword, you can use a temple sword (which is basically longsword + monk&trip properties).

[swoosh]

Kahel Stormbender wrote:

Because the long sword is based on the ENGLISH long sword. Can't think of the name off hand, but the sword you're thinking of isn't a long sword. I'm tempted to say it's a tian, but I could easily be wrong. Think Pathfinder refers to it as a temple sword though.

Jian. And yes, while they're literally different weapons, they're functionally not very different at all, both having very similar designs, uses and sizes (though English longswords tended to be a bit longer).

Temple swords are actually entirely different and very bizarre looking weapons, though they're a good substitute if you're dealing with a GM who's good with refluffing.

[Kahel Stormbender]

The jian tends to be thinner then a long sword with a wider blade too. Historically, while they were used similarly, the long sword was in fact stronger and less prone to breaking if struck badly.

[swoosh]

Kahel Stormbender wrote:

The jian tends to be thinner then a long sword with a wider blade too. Historically, while they were used similarly, the long sword was in fact stronger and less prone to breaking if struck badly.

True, though the latter was mainly because of a tendency toward cheap, easily produced weaponry in china and metal quality.

The larger point was that they're fundamentally pretty similar swords and if I was going to use one in Pathfinder I'd probably just use the longsword's stats.

Also seriously, do an image search for "adventure card game temple sword" and just... look at that thing. I'm not saying it isn't a candidate for refluffing if your GM will let you but.. it's a very odd weapon.

[FiddlersGreen]

Kahel Stormbender wrote:

Because the long sword is based on the ENGLISH long sword. Can't think of the name off hand, but the sword you're thinking of isn't a long sword. I'm tempted to say it's a tian, but I could easily be wrong. Think Pathfinder refers to it as a temple sword though.

It's 'jian', which is just the chinese word for 'sword'. It was traditionally a gentleman's weapon, and often the weapon of choice for a refined warrior. Jian forms tended to rely more on dexterity and skill than brute force, and were hence used very differently from the European longswords.

The other common bladed weapon was a 'dao' which traditionally a more common soldier's weapon. It literally literally translates to 'knife', and looks much like a scimitar, albeit generally straighter and often with a heaver/stouter blade (though variations of both scimitars and daos existed such that straighter scimitars than daos exist).

HOWEVER, whilst many martial artists trained in a variety of weapons inclusive of the dao and jian, neither had any particular association with the enlightenment pursued by 'monks'. Many such individuals could be better-likened to multi-classed monk-fighters, or maybe soheis.

[Harkevich]

Having wielded both in real life they both handle pretty differently. A European Longsword has a much finer balance - usually only a couple inches from the hilt. It swings similarly to a two handed sword and thrusts much more easily. The Jian handles more like a large knife but swings easily laterlly - it a beautiful blade if you have experience with knives, but I don't like how it handles.

[Imbicatus]

The temple sword is lifted directly from the Nayar Temple Sword of southern India.

[FiddlersGreen]

swoosh wrote:

Kahel Stormbender wrote:

The jian tends to be thinner then a long sword with a wider blade too. Historically, while they were used similarly, the long sword was in fact stronger and less prone to breaking if struck badly.

True, though the latter was mainly because of a tendency toward cheap, easily produced weaponry in china and metal quality.

The larger point was that they're fundamentally pretty similar swords and if I was going to use one in Pathfinder I'd probably just use the longsword's stats.

Also seriously, do an image search for "adventure card game temple sword" and just... look at that thing. I'm not saying it isn't a candidate for refluffing if your GM will let you but.. it's a very odd weapon.

Just as in Europe, there was a huge variance in metal quality and smelting techniques employed by different smiths for different purposes. The Europeans had their share of cheap blades and the Chinese had their share of fine ones.

As for 'fundamentally similar', I must disagree. They had superficial cosmetic similarities in the form of the straight flat blade, but the way a jian was wielded had more in common with rapier than the longsword. The blades were certainly far lighter, as it was commonly shorter than the average longsword, with a thinner and narrower blade (though not as narrow as rapiers). All this is generally speaking, of course, and variations of the jian existed that were longer and stouter.

I think what Harkevich wielded was a dao, not a jian.

[Harkevich]

FiddlersGreen wrote:

I think what Harkevich wielded was a dao, not a jian.

Wielded one of those too :), although I openly admit I have a preference for European blades since my training is for the western stuff. It's entirely possible I was using it wrong, but that was my experience.

[Atarlost]

The Jian is a not a longsword, but neither is Pathfinder's longsword a longsword.

A Longsword is a 33-43 inch blade with a long grip to accommodate two hands and a wide crossguard and weighs about 3 pounds or less. A Jian is an 18-31 inch blade with a one handed grip and a narrow crossguard and weighs about one and a half to two pounds.

An Arming Sword is around 30 inches and a bit under two and a half pounds with a wider crossguard than a Jian, but narrower than a longsword. The length and weight are around the larger end of Jians. A Spatha is about the same, but with even less of a crossguard.

A Rapier is a longsword length sword with a short grip, developed hilt, and lightened to a bit over two pounds.

The Pathfinder longsword is of unspecified length, but plainly shorter than a bastard sword, which is either synonymous with or shorter than a real longsword, and four pounds because Gary Gygax never asked someone at a proper museum what swords that weren't pot metal wall hangers "crafted" by glorified farriers should weigh and no one has ever bothered to correct his ignorance. Valeros main picture carries a large, cut down spatha. The grip is way too long for the pommel type and the blade is stupidly wide. Whoever drew him knows nothing about actual swords.

[Kahel Stormbender]

Honestly, the Japanese katana has more in common to a European long sword then the jian. Both in how it's used and it's base purpose.

[FiddlersGreen]

Harkevich wrote:

FiddlersGreen wrote:

I think what Harkevich wielded was a dao, not a jian.

Wielded one of those too :), although I openly admit I have a preference for European blades since my training is for the western stuff. It's entirely possible I was using it wrong, but that was my experience.

Or it could just have been a poorly-crafted one. XD Both in the past and today, there are smiths of varying skill who churn out blades of varying quality. Balance would be one factor in determining a good jian.

I see there are a fair number of sword-nerds here! =D

[Kahel Stormbender]

Not just swords. I collect ancient weapons, and research said weapons for fun. One weapon I find fascinating is the Italian lantern shield. It was designed for dualing. Picture the following:

First you have a buckler style shield. Attach a metal gauntlet with spikes on the knuckles to protect the hand and forearm. These spikes have ridges on them and are intended to entrap your opponent's weapon. Now add a long sword style blade. The back end is dull and extends back to the elbow to protect the arm. The business end extends a foot or so past the edge of the shield closest to your hand and is sharpened on both edges. Add a spike to the center of the shield. Now place the hardware needed to mount a small lantern to the back of the shield.

The lantern was intended to be used for dazzling your foe. It's historically unclear just how bright the lantern was.

[Harkevich]

Kahel Stormbender wrote:

Not just swords. I collect ancient weapons, and research said weapons for fun. One weapon I find fascinating is the Italian lantern shield. It was designed for dualing. Picture the following:

First you have a buckler style shield. Attach a metal gauntlet with spikes on the knuckles to protect the hand and forearm. These spikes have ridges on them and are intended to entrap your opponent's weapon. Now add a long sword style blade. The back end is dull and extends back to the elbow to protect the arm. The business end extends a foot or so past the edge of the shield closest to your hand and is sharpened on both edges. Add a spike to the center of the shield. Now place the hardware needed to mount a small lantern to the back of the shield.

The lantern was intended to be used for dazzling your foe. It's historically unclear just how bright the lantern was.

Italian City States - the Mad Scientists of the medival world.

"If one sword is good, what if I wield one in each hand?"

"And you could put an armor piercing spike on your codpiece!"

"IMMA GONNA BE SO METAL"

[FiddlersGreen]

Kahel Stormbender wrote:

Not just swords. I collect ancient weapons, and research said weapons for fun. One weapon I find fascinating is the Italian lantern shield. It was designed for dualing. Picture the following:

First you have a buckler style shield. Attach a metal gauntlet with spikes on the knuckles to protect the hand and forearm. These spikes have ridges on them and are intended to entrap your opponent's weapon. Now add a long sword style blade. The back end is dull and extends back to the elbow to protect the arm. The business end extends a foot or so past the edge of the shield closest to your hand and is sharpened on both edges. Add a spike to the center of the shield. Now place the hardware needed to mount a small lantern to the back of the shield.

The lantern was intended to be used for dazzling your foe. It's historically unclear just how bright the lantern was.

Dazzling your foe? The sight of such a contraption would probably require a will save vs confusion and then another to avoid laughing uncontrollably. XD

[Kahel Stormbender]

It looked rather nifty. And was possibly the most offensively busy defensive item ever. But exactly how well shining the lantern in your opponent's eyes actually worked, no clue. Click here for a good image of what one looked like.

[lemeres]

FiddlersGreen wrote:

The other common bladed weapon was a 'dao' which traditionally a more common soldier's weapon. It literally literally translates to 'knife', and looks much like a scimitar, albeit generally straighter and often with a heaver/stouter blade (though variations of both scimitars and daos existed such that straighter scimitars than daos exist).

HOWEVER, whilst many martial artists trained in a variety of weapons inclusive of the dao and jian, neither had any particular association with the enlightenment pursued by 'monks'. Many such individuals could be better-likened to multi-classed monk-fighters, or maybe soheis.

The simplest answer is 'the temple sword is basically a dao, and the long sword's stats were too close to what they made for them to bother making the addition'.

I would imagine that dao are more appropriate for the 'poor aethetic' monk, since single edged weapons are WAY easier and cheaper to make than double edged weapons like the jian. At least if we are talking later iron/steel based techniques (obviously, it is far simpler if you are working with bronze).

[Atarlost]

lemeres wrote:

The simplest answer is 'the temple sword is basically a dao, and the long sword's stats were too close to what they made for them to bother making the addition'.

I would imagine that dao are more appropriate for the 'poor aethetic' monk, since single edged weapons are WAY easier and cheaper to make than double edged weapons like the jian. At least if we are talking later iron/steel based techniques (obviously, it is far simpler if you are working with bronze).

The labor would be free since a monastery teaching the use of the sword would naturally have a blacksmith monk. It would be impious to just go out and buy weapons from common tradesmen rather than pursuing a holistic understanding of the weapon that includes its manufacture.

[swoosh]

I suppose you're all right about the rules.

I still think it's strange that the monk class doesn't have any proper analog to it though, given how much the monk tends to draw from wuxia and how commonly the straight sword features in that kind of media.

[lemeres]

Atarlost wrote:

lemeres wrote:

The simplest answer is 'the temple sword is basically a dao, and the long sword's stats were too close to what they made for them to bother making the addition'.

I would imagine that dao are more appropriate for the 'poor aethetic' monk, since single edged weapons are WAY easier and cheaper to make than double edged weapons like the jian. At least if we are talking later iron/steel based techniques (obviously, it is far simpler if you are working with bronze).

The labor would be free since a monastery teaching the use of the sword would naturally have a blacksmith monk. It would be impious to just go out and buy weapons from common tradesmen rather than pursuing a holistic understanding of the weapon that includes its manufacture.

Metal isn't free though.

And it takes metal in order to train blacksmiths. Metal that is likely going to go to waste, because they are terrible and just make garbage that can only serve as butter knives at first.

Metallurgy was one of the highest scientific arts for much of history. It was the driver of wars and commerce. The number of skilled metal workers, along with your access to metal, was one of the key resources of war. One of the driving reasons why the ancient world sought huge, thousand mile trade networks was because of the need for the specific metals needed to make proper bronze, which was somewhat hard to come by due to ancient mining techniques. There is a reason why the spear, which can only use a small bit of metal at the end with the rest coming from wood, was one of the most popular weapons throughout history.

Don't think this is just a simple craft check. Don't think of it from the modern perspective that comes from a practically post scarcity perspective seen due to modern techniques and trade networks making iron easy to come by.

I can see SOME blacksmiths working with a monastery, but I would not presume that they would necessarily be GOOD smiths. Again- you can make a single edge killing weapon with much more ease than two edged, and you can still kill with it. There is a reason why the jian is a 'gentleman's' weapon- it costs more than the 'knife'. Nobles can waste money training up smiths for their fancy swords.

[BadBird]

Indeed, the end of the "Bronze Age" was mostly caused by the increased scarcity of metals required to make bronze, rather than the superiority of primitive iron weaponry.

Still, most monasteries are hubs of local trade and commerce, so it's quite possible a monastery would have a skilled blacksmith, often as a "lay brother" - a person associated with the monastery but not actually under religious vows.

[Harkevich]

BadBird wrote:

Indeed, the end of the "Bronze Age" was mostly caused by the increased scarcity of metals required to make bronze, rather than the superiority of primitive iron weaponry.

Still, most monasteries are hubs of local trade and commerce, so it's quite possible a monastery would have a skilled blacksmith, often as a "lay brother" - a person associated with the monastery but not actually under religious vows.

Given it's a fantasy temple I think we can just assume that there is an awesome guy who just punches everything in shape :)

[Kahel Stormbender]

Not likely. Metal has to be heated before it can be shaped. And unless you're immune to fire/heat you wouldn't be able to pick up the heated metal bare handed. Let alone punch it. Even if you could just punch the metal into shape, it probably wouldn't have the precision or force of a blacksmith hammer.

[FiddlersGreen]

swoosh wrote:

I suppose you're all right about the rules.

I still think it's strange that the monk class doesn't have any proper analog to it though, given how much the monk tends to draw from wuxia and how commonly the straight sword features in that kind of media.

The wuxia genre is actually rather broad with varying levels of fantastical elements. Much like Western fantasy. You will find it quite hard to fit all its varied elements into a single class.

Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon or Wong Fei Hong (from the "Once upon a time in China" movies) for example boasted fantastic levels of acrobatic ability including incredible jumping, running on water and running up walls. Apart from that, things were kept relatively realistic. For instance, the legendary weapon in CTHD is not magical, just (exceptionally) masterwork and made of a special material.

Near the other end of the spectrum, you have the novels by Jin Yong, such as the famous Condor Heroes Trilogy, where ki is used to achieve things that are essentially magical effects like borderline-telekinesis, firing energy projectiles, adding elemental effects to your attacks and inflicting permanent debilitating curses. All of these at a level far beyond what a Pathfinder monk would be capable of.

And then even further along the spectrum you have the Feng Yun comics (adapted into the Storm Riders movies), which have all of the above but taken even further, and also with magical swords and beasts to boot. Major characters literally reshape the landscape when they fight.

Trying to capture all of the wuxia genre's varying levels of fantastic elements is like trying to make a single class for all of Western fantasy. Depending on what you're aiming for, you may find that a multi-class character or a hybrid class like the magus will better-fit.

[Kahel Stormbender]

Bulletproof Monk is another good example of realistic wuxia. While it has fantastical elements, much of the action is grounded (mostly) in reality.

[Lamontius]

just give your monk the 'arodenite sword training' trait and boom
proficient with longsword
tassles not included

[Kobold Catgirl]

Because katanas are far too powerful and could easily beat any other sword ever also guns.

[quibblemuch]

Harkevich wrote:

"And you could put an armor piercing spike on your codpiece!"

There is now literally nothing else I want to do in the game besides this.

[Kahel Stormbender]

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Because katanas are far too powerful and could easily beat any other sword ever also guns.

The myth that the katana could cleave through any 'lesser' weapon is just that, a myth. they had no easier a time cutting through metal as any other sword made of iron or steel. And while the number of times the steel has been folded in a katana is made a big deal of, this was actually a necessity to work out impurities from inferior sources of iron. European swords weren't folded dozens of times during the crafting, but then again they had fewer impurities in the metal to work out too.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Kahel you are literally the least fun person on this thread, and that's including lemeres the dead bird on a stick.

[Kahel Stormbender]

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Kahel you are literally the least fun person on this thread, and that's including lemeres the dead bird on a stick.

What, are you implying that historical knowledge on such an interesting topic isn't fun?

[Kobold Catgirl]

No, but this is the second time you've responded to a joke with "Actually...". :P

[Kobold Catgirl]

I kid. Humor doesn't always translate well via internets, after all. Just watch for the smileys and the more absurd assertions.

[Kahel Stormbender]

The problem is the number of people who will take an absurd assertion and believe it is fact. And this kind of is a topic I'm passionate about. I love researching ancient weapons, black smithing techniques/history, and ancient warfare tactics.

Then there's the damage Hollywood and the wire-fu genre have done to public perception of the katana and other oriental weapons. Had a friend over when I read your comment regarding how OP katanas are. He read it, nodded sagely, and in all seriousness said "Yup, that's true."

[lemeres]

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Kahel you are literally the least fun person on this thread, and that's including lemeres the dead bird on a stick.

Hey! Are you implying that I have a stick up my bum?

Because I clearly have a cloaca. Or...y'know...the rotten remnants of one. Anyway. Completely different.

[Ventnor]

Kahel Stormbender wrote:

The problem is the number of people who will take an absurd assertion and believe it is fact. And this kind of is a topic I'm passionate about. I love researching ancient weapons, black smithing techniques/history, and ancient warfare tactics.

Then there's the damage Hollywood and the wire-fu genre have done to public perception of the katana and other oriental weapons. Had a friend over when I read your comment regarding how OP katanas are. He read it, nodded sagely, and in all seriousness said "Yup, that's true."

I think you will find that katanas are made out of glorious nippon steel folded 1000 times by skilled swordsmiths who punch the blades into shape. Those swords can cut tanks in half, which was why the Aztecs never invaded Japan.

[BadBird]

lemeres wrote:

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Kahel you are literally the least fun person on this thread, and that's including lemeres the dead bird on a stick.

Hey! Are you implying that I have a stick up my bum?

Because I clearly have a cloaca. Or...y'know...the rotten remnants of one. Anyway. Completely different.

Let's not drag cloacae into this.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Why is this conversation giving me flashbacks to RPG Superstar?...

[Kahel Stormbender]

I don't know, why is it giving you flashbacks to RPG Superstar?

[GM_Beernorg]

NO, just NO!! Item PTSD!

[Atarlost]

lemeres wrote:

Atarlost wrote:

lemeres wrote:

The simplest answer is 'the temple sword is basically a dao, and the long sword's stats were too close to what they made for them to bother making the addition'.

I would imagine that dao are more appropriate for the 'poor aethetic' monk, since single edged weapons are WAY easier and cheaper to make than double edged weapons like the jian. At least if we are talking later iron/steel based techniques (obviously, it is far simpler if you are working with bronze).

The labor would be free since a monastery teaching the use of the sword would naturally have a blacksmith monk. It would be impious to just go out and buy weapons from common tradesmen rather than pursuing a holistic understanding of the weapon that includes its manufacture.

Metal isn't free though.

And it takes metal in order to train blacksmiths. Metal that is likely going to go to waste, because they are terrible and just make garbage that can only serve as butter knives at first.

Metallurgy was one of the highest scientific arts for much of history. It was the driver of wars and commerce. The number of skilled metal workers, along with your access to metal, was one of the key resources of war. One of the driving reasons why the ancient world sought huge, thousand mile trade networks was because of the need for the specific metals needed to make proper bronze, which was somewhat hard to come by due to ancient mining techniques. There is a reason why the spear, which can only use a small bit of metal at the end with the rest coming from wood, was one of the most popular weapons throughout history.

Don't think this is just a simple craft check. Don't think of it from the modern perspective that comes from a practically post scarcity perspective seen due to modern techniques and trade networks making iron easy to come by.

I can see SOME blacksmiths working with a monastery, but I would not presume that they would necessarily be GOOD smiths. Again- you can make a single...

Two edged swords do not require more metal than single edged swords and you *vastly* overestimate the cost of a to edged sword. When Rome needed to outfit thousands of soldiers with swords they didn't bother to economize on single edges. When swords became cheap and common in Europe they were double edged.

A double edged sword requires more labor, but it does not require more skill. Certain processes just need to be enacted twice. Unless you're using a folded construction, in which case my understanding is that making a double edged blade is basically impossible. But no one with decent iron does that.

And if you can't see a master blacksmith joining a monastery dedicated to swords you clearly have no romance in your soul.

[BadBird]

Atarlost wrote:

Unless you're using a folded construction, in which case my understanding is that making a double edged blade is basically impossible. But no one with decent iron does that.

Let's not drag the quality of domestically sourced iron into this.

[lemeres]

Atarlost wrote:

Two edged swords do not require more metal than single edged swords and you *vastly* overestimate the cost of a to edged sword. When Rome needed to outfit thousands of soldiers with swords they didn't bother to economize on single edges. When swords became cheap and common in Europe they were double edged.

A double edged sword requires more labor, but it does not require more skill. Certain processes just need to be enacted twice. Unless you're using a folded construction, in which case my understanding is that making a double edged blade is basically impossible. But no one with decent iron does that.

And if you can't see a master blacksmith joining a monastery dedicated to swords you clearly have no romance in your soul.

I didn't question the amount of metal in the sword (although many weapons older weapons reserve the better metal for the edges in forge welding, since that part requires it the most- so that could be an issue)- I question the materials wasted while training a competent blacksmith. Because no one wants to fight using a smiths D- homework assignment. And there can be some concern over blade geometry and where you want stress to go- with single edge, most of the blade can be used to support the edge. With double edged, the center has to be able to handle stress from either side, as well as effectively taper so it doesn't provide extra resistance to the opposite edge.

And there are several questions:
Does your monastery have good iron? Monks are usually poor aesthetics.
How many master blacksmiths join monasteries? At least enough to justify the weapon proficiency?

[Ventnor]

lemeres wrote:

Atarlost wrote:

Two edged swords do not require more metal than single edged swords and you *vastly* overestimate the cost of a to edged sword. When Rome needed to outfit thousands of soldiers with swords they didn't bother to economize on single edges. When swords became cheap and common in Europe they were double edged.

A double edged sword requires more labor, but it does not require more skill. Certain processes just need to be enacted twice. Unless you're using a folded construction, in which case my understanding is that making a double edged blade is basically impossible. But no one with decent iron does that.

And if you can't see a master blacksmith joining a monastery dedicated to swords you clearly have no romance in your soul.

I didn't question the amount of metal in the sword (although many weapons older weapons reserve the better metal for the edges in forge welding, since that part requires it the most- so that could be an issue)- I question the materials wasted while training a competent blacksmith. Because no one wants to fight using a smiths D- homework assignment.

And there are several questions:
Does your monastery have good iron? Monks are usually poor aesthetics.
How many master blacksmiths join monasteries? At least enough to justify the weapon proficiency?

If it's a monastery dedicated to a God of crafting, Torag for example, why wouldn't it have a lot of iron?

[lemeres]

Ventnor wrote:

If it's a monastery dedicated to a God of crafting, Torag for example, why wouldn't it have a lot of iron?

First- want to apologize since you are quote a version I was editing. Doesn't look like a problem, but I always feel guilty when someone comments on me before I finish editing.

Second- now we are getting into the difference between the philophy focused monks used in the game with the...y'know...literal definition of monk (in a world where clergy take on a different meaning since the gods hand out super powers...). The disconnect between the kungfu master and the actual mundane guy that helps out the poor and such.

[Mahtobedis]

I founded a monastery on an iron mine. Initiates to my monastery mine ore. After they build muscles doing that they are trained as smiths. Everyone eventually ends up a smith in my monastery. Even the cook. Unfortunately we spend so much time making swords that we aren't actually very good at using them.

[Atarlost]

Monks may be poor. Monasteries are as wealthy as any lord. The vikings didn't sack Lindesfarne because there was nothing there worth taking. Nor were the monasteries dispossessed in any country where Catholocism lost sway because the land they held was worthless. You can't have a monastery without a productive land grant and tax paying tenants.

Warrior monks as represented by Pathfinder's monk class can be expected to produce fancy swords the way medieval European monks produced beautifully illuminated Bibles. The swords are cheaper, quicker, and easier to produce.

You can't have concerns about the quality of your iron and late medieval weapons and armor. Pathfinder has the latter, therefore it cannot have the former. It's a sixteenth century game not a tenth century game.

[Piccolo]

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Because katanas are far too powerful and could easily beat any other sword ever also guns.

Facepalm. That is complete bull, and you know it.