Discussion in 'Sword Arts Talk' started by PhotonGuy, Feb 18, 2016.
Which one would you choose?
None of them.
2, maybe 3
I think that's a case of "try before you buy." They all look appealing, though.
Expansion on my answer.
I have at least several dozen sharp objects of KNOWN quality, from small 3" folders (one handed, assisted open, or auto) to modern fixed blades, to fully functional European and Japanese swords.
I distrust blades that are too shiny. Working blades cannot maintain a mirror polish.
Given a chance to assess the quality of the blades, I would select whichever I thought was the best.
Given a selection of blades of equally high quality, I would choose either a rapier or katana (those being the ones I am most competent with) if I expected to be in a large open area.
For enclosed spaces, I'd choose a large fixed blade if there were no need for concealment.
For concealment, I'd choose an auto or assisted opening 4-5" blade.
Of course, this assumes I've made the rather odd decision to leave my guns out of the equation.
I made the assumption that all the blades are of the same quality, and he was simply asking which ones we were most familiar with/enjoyed using the most. That is how I came up with my answer.
I choose the pudao (#4)
you have sharp folders? Are we talking about the same type of folder?
I always knew paper cuts were dangerous but didnt know they were that bad...
I suspect they would all be too long and/or heavy for me to use successfully.
Assuming they are all of equal and high quality, the Nordic piece would be most similar in size and dimensions to the Chinese sword method that I have experience with. The long sword is also something of interest, and I also have some small experience with that in the context of Chinese methods.
So those would be my preferences.
The pudao could be fun to play with. I'm not a katana man.
If they are poor quality, then I want none of them.
I want the one that is +5 vs Undead.
What is the situation where it will be utilized?
Im Guessing the situation is simply general preference.
Each weapon was designed for specific purposes. Not simply for a general preference.
No, I was reffering to the question.
"Which one would you choose?" As in asking which you prefer
Well, I have more training in #2 than #1. If it's for a one on one duel without armour, #2 is the best choice for me, due to training and reach. Also objectively, it's the most practical weapon there for such a scenario. It's also the best for such a duel armoured by far. If I were required to draw the sword quickly under duress, then #1 since it's shorter and curved, and I also have training in that. If it's to be paired with a large shield, then #3, since that's what it was designed for, though #2 can be used with a buckler.
I know nothing about the use of a pudao, but I'm sure it's very cool. It would be my last choice due to lack of familiarity and reach. I'm sure in the proper context it would be optimal, but I don't know what that might be.
The grip on the viking sword is too long.
1 or 2
Separate names with a comma.