[Kemapreedasse]

Yeah, they'd have full armor, but a samurai would know to strike at the legs most likely as well; probably more effectively, too.

Yeah, but are legs legal target's for a samurai? After all, duels were a personal thing. I havem't seen in kn\enjutsu any strike aimed at the legs.. but yeah.

[rozneesitcn]

samurais wore armours too, right? you guys might have forgotten that. samurais without armours were probably the low class warriors.

~taganahan

[jesyflowers]

have you even ever had medieval armor on? you cant frigin move in those things, now way you can see the strike coming with such a visor, let alone move your arm with the shield up fast enough to block it. And even if you manage, the samurai would see the knights moves coming from miles away and could easely adjust his strike or dodge

[thushioli]

If an alien and a predator had swords and .....

nice one


cheers Michael

[hotelhyatt]

there was an article on this in swordforum.com It brought up some good points. It had to do with the effectiveness of the armor. The knights armor was heavier but protected a larger percentage of the body.


If you look at the skill, I still haven't figured out what the knights did but bash eachother and try to skewer eachother. I would see the samurai cutting joints and unprotected areas like the kneck.

[layevymed]

good post kanyi

[Stappipsy]

You gotta read this:
http://www.thehaca.com/essays/knightvs.htm

I just came across this place, it may be pretty interesting to all who were at least a little bit curious...

[immelawealecy]

Hehe, Just checking the poll, the numbers rule out 50/50. Such a puzzling thought considering that it was medieval knights and the samurai that really made their mark in history as effective warriors.

For Drizzt:
I'm thinking about the typical "medieval knight" a sword, shield, no horse, just all out man battle, as far as armor, i am unsure of what material medieval knights used, im sure it depends on where or how rich a kingdom was. Im talking just "typically".

My opinion is that although medieval knights do have armor and a shield, a samurai and their ingenuity in their katanas could quite possibly pierce armor. On the other hand, I would feel as if the samurai wouldnt know how to go against a shield as many of their practices involve sword to sword combat.

[liontutuxx]

samurai would win in less then 2 secs ...

[TravelMan]

Trying to compare samurai to knights is like comparing apples to bathtubs....they are just too different. Who would win in a dual? As with any dual (samurai vs samurai, knight vs knight, or samurai vs knight) the respective skill of those involved will decide the out come. How a sword is used does not take away from its efficacy. Also, don't assume that all western swords were blunt, blugeoning objects. There were some exceptional swords made throughout europe. Why we don't see many of them is that your average soldier would buy something cheeper, and readily available.

The main problem in comparing japanese swords to european is simple, in europe you could get either a good/expensive sword, or a cheaper one; in japan you could get a good/expensive sword, or have none at all.
If you want a good comparison, use unarmoured opponents, with simmilar weapons (katana vs sabre). At least then you have a starting point, but it still all comes down to the relative skill of the participants.

[picinaRefadia]

here are some good points



"As a sword, the Japanese katana is unmatched in its sharpness and cutting power. Furthermore, it is particularly good at cutting against metal (–but no, it only cuts through other swords in movies and video games!). ... Though this is devastating on a draw slice against flesh and bone, it is much less effective against armors. Realizing this, several styles of Japanese swordsmanship devised specific techniques not to cut at armor, but to stab and thrust at the gaps and joints of it just as the Europeans did against their own plate armor" duh

one even more wonderful problem to throw into this mix, european armor of the late middle ages is specificaly designed to NOT have any gaps, owing to the prominence of the calvary lance and other jabing weapons. this realy is a mute point

the early knight in chain mail would have been even or maybe at a disadvantage to a well trained and equiped samuri. a later medevial knight in full european plate would have had a pretty hefty advantage in that the katana is not capable of piercing/ or cutting through a well made set of milanese or gothic armor would have been built.

its all dependant on time period, training, equipment. it would be an extremely interesting fight however.

[Enfotanab]

myeah perhaps, I thought they meant to use the shield to block the incoming attacks, but if they use to just ram him, who knows?
It'll probably come down to skill of the warriors too.
and there must be a spot where your blade can cut through

your right there will be but it depends on the kind of armour they are wearing for heavy plate armor you would have to get in real close to get at a joint or chink

[hitaEtela]

If the Knight is in full armour , the Samurai ( purely speculative) would use the terrain or the weight of the armour against the adversary.. Either tire the Knight or lead him to unsteady ground. The English did it to the French winning the Battle of Agincourt (1415 AD) when outnumbered 3-1. History said it was the longbow , historians now say it was the mud that slowed the knights and the bowmen finished the job with knives in hand to hand.Thus lightly armoured foot soldiers beat heavily armoured knights.
The other point to bring up would be the fact that if a Knight was mortally wounded but killed the Samurai in the battle , the fight would be viewed by some Samurai as a victory ( going by historical texts) . Not a European way of thinking but a victory none the less.

P.S. as I said this is purely and highly speculative . I also have very little knowledge of Knights etc so I can only go on the little info I have read and seen.

cheers Michael

[SDorothy28]

there was an interesting documentary on nhk the other week about the mongolians attempts to invade japan. the mongolians had sent several messages to japan about using kyushu as a staging ground for an assault on southern china. the japanese did not reply to any of their messages which pissed off the mongolians no end so they decided to invade.

i think that the first invasion took place in hakkodate. the samurai could see their boats coming in and were waiting on the beach for them. you would think that samurai would have easily defeated the savage mongol hordes but not so. in this encounter the samurai got a real hiding and were defeated.

the reason for this was because of the differences in fighting styles. when samurai fought each other it was always 1 on 1. before the fight they would stop to introduce themselves to each other. the mongolians however, didn't care for such niceities and attacked in groups which overwhelmed the samurai.

after this first battle the mongolians didn't have enough men or supplies to stay so they left.

by the time they returned they had captured the southern part of china. from the northern part they returned with 1000 boats and from the newly captured part 3500. both fleets were to meet at the same time and attack together. but the 3500 boat fleet took a month longer to depart because of the logistics of organising such a large fleet. the 1000 boat fleet arrived first but did not attack right away. the samurai saw them waiting then at night sent out loads of small boats. the samurai then surprised them and were able to board their boats and fight in a small space which meant the mongolians couldn't fight in groups. the samurai killed many of them.

the next day i think the mongolians decided to attack but were held back because the japanese archers had a much longer range and prevented them from landing.

after a few weeks the 1000 boat fleet ran out of supplies and had to return without waiting for the 3500 boat fleet to arrive. because the large fleet took so long to leave, the weather had changed dramatically when it did and they ran into the rainy season. i think over half off their boats were sunk by typhoons.

when both fought with their own advantage, they were successful. if the all off the 4500 mongolian boats had arrived at the same time as planned, i think that they could have overwhelmed the samurai. they also had a formidable cavalry.

i think that a fight between samurai and knights would be much harder to call.

[RichardFG435]

We'd arm our knight with fork and knife, and our samurai with chopsticks.

Give them 10 plates of noodles. Who finishes first wins the battle.

...now, what noodles? uhmmm

[PRengin]

samurai would have much greater speed. no way the knight can react fast enough with a heavy shield and his body wrapped in heavy metal.
plus a decent katana could cut through some parts of the knight's armor I think. and there are always weaknesses in armor(joints etc)
samurai could always tsuki through the visor of the knights helmet

[tuszit]

the thing is, while the knights armor is very restrictive, full plate would completely negate the main advantage the samuri has. A katana, though an amazing chopping weapon, would stand no chance against plate or heavy mail. it simply cannot pierce effectivly, and chopping is very ineffective against plate. look at most medevial weapons. while the sword was a prestige weapon, the most effective weapons of the age of plate were those that pierced. we get wonderful weapons like the brain spoon. I think it would be a very close match, but eventualy the knight would prevail in a purely melee situation. now bring in archery or pole arm type weapons on the samuri's side, the game might be a little more even.

btw, medevial armor, when made for YOU in particular, is not as restrictive as you might think. especialy when the helm is of an open or falling basenet style.

[thomaskkk]

A knights main form of fighting was a Cavelry Charge and if not a tightly packed group charge with lances protruding through the shields, so in other words they werent really essentialy designed as inidivudal fighters so the comparison is slightly lost

The best thing to probably compare Samurai's too are Spartan Hoplites which had similar lives to those of the samurai (namely centred around fighting and the arts of war) plus they wore similr army, namely concentrated at the head and torso.

VS



Who knows?

[TRASIAOREXOLA]

myeah perhaps, I thought they meant to use the shield to block the incoming attacks, but if they use to just ram him, who knows?
It'll probably come down to skill of the warriors too.
and there must be a spot where your blade can cut through

[golozhopik]

If an alien and a predator had swords and .....