Registered: May 2005
Location: .::The Anti-Fanboy Confederation::.
Well...I'm full off bias here since I am Kenjutsu practioner myself.
But at least I think a Katana fighter would pretty much own a rapier fighter because a rapier is a weapon used one-handed only and it's more a thrusting weapon than a slash weapon. At least the masters of Rapier fights (such as Ridolfo Capoferro or Savinien Cyrano de Bergerac) used thrusts and nearly no slashs and it was common to use a secondary weapon (dagger) or even a cape for defense.
Now a Katana is a two-handed weapon and it can be used for thrusting and for slashing and I actualy think it's the most deadly weapon to use when it comes to melee combat. And a Samurai would be the most deadly user of that weapon. So if it's European fencer vs Samurai I would say the Samurai wins.
Just have a look at this:
Attachment: nobuhide.jpg
This has been downloaded 37 time(s).
__________________
"Dear God, what is it like in your funny little brains?"
Registered: Feb 2005
Location: Hiding from zombies
One thing... Does a katana go through thick European armor? Jusr curious.... Because the Samurai fought enemies who were lightly armed at best, unarmed more often than not, while European fighters wore heavy, protective armor until the invention of the crossbow and then gunpowder put an emphasis on speed. So really, to compare a rapier master versus a samurai is a bit off considering each "evolved" out of different circumstances.
Ahah, but when the Europeans used that hell-heavy armor, they were still riding horses and wielding lances and broadswords. Rapiers wouldn't be that effective against thick and heavy armor. And even with such armor, the Samurai would simply need a well-placed swing at the weaker chain-mail present in the gaps in the armor, such as at the neck.
Registered: May 2005
Location: .::The Anti-Fanboy Confederation::.
Rapier fighters didn't wear any kind of armor at least the masters of that art were around in the 16th and 17th century. Rapier fencing was no "military" skill.
In medieval times the people wore that heavy armor (chain, plate) but in this time no one would have used a rapier. If you take a look at the weapons back then they were heavy enough to break bones when hitting somebody.
__________________
"Dear God, what is it like in your funny little brains?"
Registered: Feb 2005
Location: Hiding from zombies
I knew that, I just somehow started talking about something totally different. But anyways, my point was to compare them directly would be impossible since both came about for different purposes. I mean, Europeans didn't focus on weapon mastery outside of what it takes to win on the battlefield until melee weapons were already in decline.
The thing is, mos European armour was not weak at the neck. They made a neck guard because otherwise it would leave you with a major flaw that anyone could see.
Registered: May 2005
Location: .::The Anti-Fanboy Confederation::.
Ah yes...that's right. Rapier fighting was more likely a "hobby" or "sport" than something useful. Still they did a lot of dueling with that things.
And well...a Katana might be able to cut chain armor and the physical strength behind a two-handed strike might be enough to break bones of somebody who wears plate armor. Those things are really sharp.
__________________
"Dear God, what is it like in your funny little brains?"
Actually, most people who used rapiers didn't fight for a living, but those noblemen that wanted to live certainly weren't bad at it.
Yes, katanas are two handed weapons, and very fearsome ones at that, but the rapier type sword wasn't a slouch. While it is one handed, it attacks the weakest point of the katana, which is much more effective at blocking slashes than stabs.
Also, to block a slash, you don't need to counter the force, you just need to slightly redirect it, which isn't too dificult for the duelist to do. Also, with a free hand, the rapier duelist has counterbalance and is able to be more nimble on his feet, including the use of feints and close body parries in order to avoid getting hit. And while rapiers are primary piercing weapons, they do have edges and as a result, can slash.
It would be a good fight in the fact it would be power vs. deception.
If the rapier duelist was quick on his feet, I say he could take this, if the katana duelist was precise, he'd win.
I personally would find it very hard pressed to dual wield much of anything. If you watched the Olympic sport of fencing, particularly the saber division, you'd notice just has fast they can move that rapier.
The fencer will need every bit of speed and nimbleness on their feet they can get.
The primary reason Florentine style duelists may equip a second weapon, usually a short dagger on their lesser hand, is to parry that lightning quick stab that avoids their rapier. While the dagger alone is not sufficient by any means, it's their last line of defense before they get skewered.
I would find it much more awkward to duel wield, especially since you don't have the counterbalance or the ability to make feints and lunges anywhere near as easily.
Registered: Feb 2005
Location: Hiding from zombies
Hm. I've always thought the advantages to using just one weapon outweight the advantages of using two. Besides, using two is a clumsy art at best, and an abysmal failure at worst.
Registered: May 2005
Location: .::The Anti-Fanboy Confederation::.
Well...the "new" Katanas are quite better then the "old" ones because of material developement.
But well...I've read some book about the "Battle of Whispy" (1361) and they found people in chain armor that had cut both legs off with one single strike. Urm...I guess a Katana would pretty much own somebody in chain armor.
__________________
"Dear God, what is it like in your funny little brains?"
Registered: May 2005
Location: .::The Anti-Fanboy Confederation::.
The point is: A Katana user might just aim at your Rapiers blade and not at your body and this might be enough to end the existence of the rapier because those things aren't made for taking direct hits from "heavy weight" weapons.
Well yes...it would be power vs deception. Still a "precise" Katana fighter can use thrust attacks and I guess it would be pretty hard to fend some two-handed slash with a one handed weapon.
__________________
"Dear God, what is it like in your funny little brains?"
Aug 9th, 2005 12:55 AM
Attachment: 
http://darthglentract.tripod.com/index.html Go Jawa's!!
