"slash" and kenjutsu, BnF2?

[Vigilance]

You guys are right about the mutually deadly duels.

However, based on my studies of Samurai duels, that was VERY frequently the case when Samurai fought each other. So I don't believe I'd ascribe the mutual deaths you mention to an inability to defend thrusting attacks (which is where Im disagreeing with you guys- I dont think Samurai did not know how to deal with thrusting attacks).

Samurai thought it was a good day to die and fought with a high risk/high reward fighting style.

If you look at the number of samurai v. samaurai duels you'll see about the same % of mutual deaths which is why they were slowly made illegal during the Tokugawa regime.

Chuck

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

No, it wasn't that they COULDN'T defend thrusting attacks, its just that they routinely underestimated the ability of a rapier in the hands of a trained warrior to penetrate their armor and deliver a fatal blow, much less with such rapidity.

 

[Vigilance]

But again, Samurai didnt ever play defense with each other either.

My point is, they just weren't afraid to die.

There's a reason why the young Musashi was in Edo (Tokyo) taking on all comers, and the middle aged Musashi was fighting on islands well away from the mainland in carefully plannes (and secret) duels.

It was because the age of the dueling samurai was gradually legislated out of existence during his lifetime.

Why was this? Because more often than not you ended up with two dead samurai at the end of the duel.

So if samurai killed each other it was Bushido, but when they died killing a westerner it was underestimation of his weaponry and tactics?

That's one way to look at it I suppose.

Chuck

 

[Tellerve]

So, not to get my post back on the original topic But what do you think about across the board feats for weapon increases Vig? If not, why'd you choose slashing weapons as the one to get it?

In a similar vein, something like groin kick trouble me when they aren't a minimum of once a round. Why wouldn't you just keep kicking with "groin kick" since it ups the die of damage?

Tellerve

 

[Vigilance]

You could. Circle kick does the same thing, and has the same effect, and can also be performed once per round.

About Slash, there's the Thrust maneuver for piercing weapons, so between Slash and Thrust most melee weapons are covered.

I personally wouldnt allow similar feats for ranged weapons.

Chuck

 

[Tellerve]

true, but thrust does +2 to hit. Which you could compare to jab, however, someone jabbing could do one of the other hand to hand manuvers to get the extra die of damage, hence the choices of what to do per round. With a guy that has a slashing weapon, all he is doing is slashing, so he's always getting the +1 die of damage. Same with the thrusting guy, he's always just getting the +2 to hit. I didn't mind the jab and other hand to hand because I felt that there might be some thought of what to do per round (not counting the ones that do extra damage and have a special effect and can be used more than once a round).

But slash and thrust just don't fit in there for me. *shrugs* I think maybe I'm just the oddity then, and I'll have to figure out something myself.

Thanks,

Tellerve

 

[ledded]

gah! double-postiness

 

[ledded]

You guys are right about the mutually deadly duels.

However, based on my studies of Samurai duels, that was VERY frequently the case when Samurai fought each other. So I don't believe I'd ascribe the mutual deaths you mention to an inability to defend thrusting attacks (which is where Im disagreeing with you guys- I dont think Samurai did not know how to deal with thrusting attacks).

Samurai thought it was a good day to die and fought with a high risk/high reward fighting style.

If you look at the number of samurai v. samaurai duels you'll see about the same % of mutual deaths which is why they were slowly made illegal during the Tokugawa regime.

Chuck

Very true Vig. Very true. It's like that line from the Hagakure... <not sure this is exact, I'm going from memory here> "Even if one's head were to be suddenly cut off, he should be able to do one more action with certainty. With martial valor, if one becomes like a revengeful ghost and shows great determination, though his head is cut off, he should not die".

But like I said in my long-winded post, I do truly believe that many, if not most, samurai (depending on period) would have been trained to handle rapid footwork and thrusts. Mutual deaths in duels between rapier and sword I would predominately assign to Samurai mentality, and the fact that irregardless of popular belief, some of those rapier guys may have just been better swordsmen, but didnt expect some crazy little japanese guy to keep swinging at them with 6 inches of steel in his belly . While it's certainly true or even likely that many Samurai, through ingrained feeling of superiority or just plain stubborness, underestimated the reach and style of a rapier-wielder, I feel that it was probably less than systematic. Maybe more misunderstanding or underestimation of philosophy than purely the opposed weapon system on either side; experienced swordsmen/warriors often develop the art of evaluating and understanding another's fighting style quickly, because those who don't usually don't live to become experienced swordsmen.

And remember too that the "one hit and he dies" view of sword duels perpetrated by the movies is not very accurate at all; in 18th century france, nearly 70% of the smallsword duellists killed as a result of duels died 2 or more days after their wounding, and quite a few of those resulted in the death of both parties. These weren't "first blood" duels either, which normally were considered unmanly or unsatisfying (another movie contradiction); they fought until one or the other simply couldnt go on and would submit, lose consciousness, or be stopped by a judge/seconds . I don't have solid statistics for a lot of other settings such as early rapier, Tokugawa japanese, viking duels of law, etc, but there are hosts of anecdotal evidence suggesting that quite a few folks survived sword duels only to succumb to their injuries, infection, etc later.

EDIT: Another side note; my Kenjutsu sensei gave us some figures from a study performed by several japanese sword historians about duels from the pre-Tokugawa era up until their outlawing during that period. According to these studies, the average length of a duel between two samurai was estimated to be around 8 seconds. Fast. I wish I could remember the reference to the study right now.

 

[Vigilance]

Well there are weapons capable of both thrust and slash- Id put many pole arms in that category.

I also allow many maneuvers to be performed with a weapon such as Block, Hip Throw and anything based on tripping or disarming your opponent.

Its such a broad topic that I can never seem to cover it all to everyone's satisfaction. BNF I had little in the way of grappling or weapon styles. BNF II has more grappling weapons, but still not enough for everyone's taste it seems.

Ah well

Chuck

true, but thrust does +2 to hit. Which you could compare to jab, however, someone jabbing could do one of the other hand to hand manuvers to get the extra die of damage, hence the choices of what to do per round. With a guy that has a slashing weapon, all he is doing is slashing, so he's always getting the +1 die of damage. Same with the thrusting guy, he's always just getting the +2 to hit. I didn't mind the jab and other hand to hand because I felt that there might be some thought of what to do per round (not counting the ones that do extra damage and have a special effect and can be used more than once a round).

But slash and thrust just don't fit in there for me. *shrugs* I think maybe I'm just the oddity then, and I'll have to figure out something myself.

Thanks,

Tellerve

 

[Vigilance]

EDIT: Another side note; my Kenjutsu sensei gave us some figures from a study performed by several japanese sword historians about duels from the pre-Tokugawa era up until their outlawing during that period. According to these studies, the average length of a duel between two samurai was estimated to be around 8 seconds. Fast. I wish I could remember the reference to the study right now.

Right, that concurs with the reading I have done. One reason why iaijutsu became such a force in Japanese kenjutsu was that the best survival chance you had in a duel was to strike first.

In fact many times a Samurai who wasnt quite ready to die would just concede if his opponent drew his sword first, and bloodless duels were fought in the later Tokugawa where the first sword out was declared the victor.

While this process became steeped in ritual, it was based on the combat reality that the first blade out was the most likely to walk away.

According to a Sensei I read often, this high risk/high reward combat strategy reveals more about Japanese psychology than sound tactical strategy.

Many HTH combat styles are structured *exactly* like this (Shotokan springs to mind here) where both fighters would often cripple each other when they attacked, which led to, like Kenjutsu duels, an often long period of studying and watching your opponent, circling him, seeking a weakness in his footwork that would allow you to sieze the advantage.

This aspect of the Japanese martial arts is not more evident in the modern world, according to this Sensei, because most fights in the street are conducted between one trained individual and one untrained individual. This affords the martial artist more safety and "self defense" than he would have were his opponent equally well trained.

Another example of this psychology showing itself to be quintessentially Japanese is Pearl Harbor. The Japanese leaders at the time were aware that they could not defeat the United States in a protracted struggle. However they were willing to take that chance with a high risk/high reward attack.

Pearl Harbor then can be seen as a decapitation attack that failed (barely).

Chuck