Fencing and Honorverse do they go together?

SharkHunter wrote:...
...
As to who'd win, I don't know and lack the skill to discuss it effectively, though I think the heavier sword wins every time.
That's based on my question as to whether any foil could block a "first swing" power stroke against a heavier sword without breaking -- we broke high grade steel epee(s) in our fancing classes with unfortunate frequency. ...

Fencing blades are made to bend unlike killing blades. Even maraging fencing blades can only take so much metal fatigue.

As for weight countering all, you are thinking direct parries in your post and both parties just kinda standing there, I think. Think circular parries which are more judo-like in nature. As well, for attacks, cutovers and related allow one to close both to hit and to parry/bind any counterattack with superior leverage even with a lighter weapon (body contact rules become important here however). These maneuvers are all faster to execute with the lighter weapon.

jgnfld wrote:

Temmy wrote:A musketeer isn't going to be using a fencing type foil or an epee. Those are practice and sporting weapons introduced much later.

He will be using a rapier. Rapiers are not floppy and light..they weigh 2.5 to 3 pounds, are four feet long and very very stiff. They are *lethal* duelling weapons, and in my experience have an advantage over conventional two handed swords due to their reach.

As I remember, rapiers are what the Italians I mention above were wielding. But that book is now back in the university library.

The light bulb comes on, and I stand corrected. I'd completely forgot about the rapier, and y'all are correct, it's not just weight that wins, but metal on metal, katana size swords I think will still break the foils/epees. But not a rapier. I would hazard a guess that very few samurai would defeat a skilled wielder of that blade.

My memory was faulty. Rapiers evolved through a couple of stages into lighter and somewhat shorter weapons and the Napoleanic sword would have likely have been a shortsword: Basically a stripped down, shortened rapier with no edge at all (usually triangle shaped) that is much faster to use but still nicely strong. Epees derive from this weapon.

jgnfld wrote:

Temmy wrote:A musketeer isn't going to be using a fencing type foil or an epee. Those are practice and sporting weapons introduced much later.

He will be using a rapier. Rapiers are not floppy and light..they weigh 2.5 to 3 pounds, are four feet long and very very stiff. They are *lethal* duelling weapons, and in my experience have an advantage over conventional two handed swords due to their reach.

As I remember, rapiers are what the Italians I mention above were wielding. But that book is now back in the university library.

SharkHunter wrote:The light bulb comes on, and I stand corrected. I'd completely forgot about the rapier, and y'all are correct, it's not just weight that wins, but metal on metal, katana size swords I think will still break the foils/epees. But not a rapier. I would hazard a guess that very few samurai would defeat a skilled wielder of that blade.

That's my take on it, too: the rapier is probably the best sword available for a one-on-one duel against another swordsman. I'm a staunch advocate of the smallsword (and spend a fair bit of time sparring against rapiers with one - I'm an active HEMA practitioner), but the rapier's advantage of reach can be difficult to overcome. Moreover, if the rapier is being used against a longsword or katana (or similar weapon with considerable mechanical advantage in the cut from the two-handed grip), it's capable of effective blocks against them...something that can't be said of the feathery smallsword. A cut from a rapier is not as powerful as from most other swords, but it's still nothing an unarmored person can afford to ignore.

Rapiers also have far better hand protection than most other swords (backswords and their kin being an exception), a not-inconsiderable factor in a real fight. Any real hit to the sword hand or wrist is a fight-ender.

A bit about heavy blows: most schools of fencing (historical fencing, not sport fencing...) made it clear that very hard and heavy blows were something you had to set up for...techniques of opportunity, really. Extremely hard blows are very, very risky, largely because of what happens if you don't connect. If the opponent can evade the blow rather than interdict it, you're going to find yourself way off line, ceding the centerline in a big way. That often ends badly... =P There's certainly a place for "swinging for the fences," but you really have to choose wisely with that!

Festival wrote:...

A bit about heavy blows: most schools of fencing (historical fencing, not sport fencing...) made it clear that very hard and heavy blows were something you had to set up for...techniques of opportunity, really. Extremely hard blows are very, very risky, largely because of what happens if you don't connect. If the opponent can evade the blow rather than interdict it, you're going to find yourself way off line, ceding the centerline in a big way. That often ends badly... =P There's certainly a place for "swinging for the fences," but you really have to choose wisely with that!

Re. all out attacks: Yes. Even with puny little foils where all you want is a touche within the timing and priority criteria...consider the usual result of an unsuccessful fleche. Especially in a dueling context as opposed to a touch context.

One weakness of straight swords over long swords that I just learned by reading some of y'alls links. "The" or at least one reason the Katana and the Grayson swords are curved, that I had never thought about, [my thinking: dual use cavalry or infantry weapon]... Apparently a curved blade cuts more easily.

Once it was explained it becomes a no, duh! proposition as to why and how it was and would be used. Might even shift a killing advantage back to the skilled practitioner always going for a kill, except if they were both in "street clothes" in which case the rapier likely still wins.

What I was reading is that it cuts easier at point of contact because it concentrates the swing force in a smaller section of that uber sharp blade. If you look at samurai body armor in an all up melee, and you'd want that cutting advantage to wound the opponent. The linked article also says curved blades get stuck less which is useful if you need to get said sharp fighting weapon out of body #1 for use on bodies # "incoming!!"".

Conceptually though. I really like that German sword referred to in a prior post that resembles the katana shape, with the cross shaped hand guard. Bit more likely to keep my hands attached to my wrists, I think.

SharkHunter wrote:
What I was reading is that it cuts easier at point of contact because it concentrates the swing force in a smaller section of that uber sharp blade. If you look at samurai body armor in an all up melee, and you'd want that cutting advantage to wound the opponent. The linked article also says curved blades get stuck less which is useful if you need to get said sharp fighting weapon out of body #1 for use on bodies # "incoming!!"".

Conceptually though. I really like that German sword referred to in a prior post that resembles the katana shape, with the cross shaped hand guard. Bit more likely to keep my hands attached to my wrists, I think.

Blades used for actual fighting were never kept super sharp. Super sharp edges chip easily and require alot of maintenance. Cutting ability comes from many things such as technique and blade geometry..sharpness is only one factor.

Sharpness wont help you at all in a fight against an armoured opponent. You cannot cut armour, so these fights involve alot of grappling. Each opponent closes in on the other to try and break joints and expose weakpoints such as the armpits or groin. The Europeans would hold their swords in what is known as the halfsword..one hand on the hilt, the other hand half way up the blade and use it like a short spear.

For the japanese, this is where the arts that evolved into Jujutsu would come into play. The Europeans also evolved jujutsu-like arts known by names such as Kampfringen and Armizare in order to break joints and throw the opponents to the ground

Temmy wrote: Blades used for actual fighting were never kept super sharp. Super sharp edges chip easily and require alot of maintenance. Cutting ability comes from many things such as technique and blade geometry..sharpness is only one factor....

For the japanese, this is where the arts that evolved into Jujutsu would come into play. The Europeans also evolved jujutsu-like arts known by names such as Kampfringen and Armizare in order to break joints and throw the opponents to the ground

Hmmm, not so correct on how jiujutsu evolved, [I lived in apan an area where one of the jiujitsu styles was homed] and the sharpness factor of samurai swords was quite high, In fact the pinnacle of swordmaking centuries ago in Japan was said to be that a "good: weapon that wouldn't cut a piece of paper floated in a trough towards it without requiring a hand moving the blad, and an "evil blade" would cut anyway.

Secondarily, while the samurai were well armored when fighting in big groups, they also used fairly skilled archers to attack those formations, refer to Agincourt for the result of that kind of battle. I can guarantee that groups or solo style, the first scoring slashes ended the fight for the loser, even if only by bleedout, amputation, or a slash that simply splits a large muscle to the point it can't function.

I'm not THAT good with a katana or wakizashi (but also not THAT bad), and I can guarantee that if I sharpened my practice sword(s) up to knife edge, I don't care how uber skilled a practitioner of Jiujitsu is, they'd never close into grappling range before I wounded that person enough to put them into a hospital. Knife yes, they'd close, but slashing sword, no.

The samurai did curved sword fighting for a living, and while there can be a small amount of "bashing" in sword combat, it was mostly to break away and get back out of blade range.

You can't cut through metal armour with a sword. Otherwise no one would wear it. To damage someone in armour you need to attack weak points, break joints or throw to the ground. To do this, you need to get in real close.

You can see an example of how the europeans did it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4k-vjdeZO4

Here's how the Japanese did it: (most relevant parts at 2:30)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQXtTxJ7_nA

Sharkhunter wrote:
I'm not THAT good with a katana or wakizashi (but also not THAT bad), and I can guarantee that if I sharpened my practice sword(s) up to knife edge, I don't care how uber skilled a practitioner of Jiujitsu is, they'd never close into grappling range before I wounded that person enough to put them into a hospital. Knife yes, they'd close, but slashing sword, no.

Of course, but the point is, both fighters have weapons and armour. They wont be able to cut each other easily. They will need to get close into grappling range. JuJutsu as we know it evolved from arts such as Kumiuchi which were intended for use in combat by armoured men.

If your foe is not wearing armour you wont need to keep a very sharp sword. Flesh is easy to cut. Sharpening the sword too finely will make the edge too fragile and will alter the blade geometry.

Temmy's my honorable expert on the subject so I want to toss in a question. I was watching an interview with the swordmaster who choreographed both Princess Bride and Pirates of the Caribbean, and he made a statement that with bladed weapons, the parry is with the spine of the sword, not the cutting edge.

So in reading all the various posts about katana(s) not being that all that sharp because the blade would have nicked/chipped and been worn down too quickly seem invalid. Plus we know that in formation, it wasn't the swords that did the damage, it was archery and other weapons.

Japanese metallurgy vs. Grayson steel nearly to Damascas steel levels aside, knowing that the Grayson swords are honor weapons, katana style with part of the spine sharpened enough to lay Burdette wide open.

Given that RFC's choice is what we live with in this fictional universe, our theorizing doesn't matter as much but my question is "real world for a bladed weapon", effective sword or not?"