|
Post by spikeynorman47 on Sept 28, 2017 18:43:37 GMT
I'm quite a short fellow(5ft 8in), shortest of my friends except one. Would the "best" strategy for me to be go with smaller swords, like a messer? Or go with longer ones to compensate my lack of reach? I'd like to keep this topic confined to medieval as that's my favorite time period. But I do love the gladius, rapier and various renaissance swords Also I'd like to stick to the topic of swords, I know the best on a battlefield would be a polearm or ranged weapon of some kind lol.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 28, 2017 19:42:23 GMT
I'm quite a short fellow(5ft 8in), shortest of my friends except one. Would the "best" strategy for me to be go with smaller swords, like a messer? Or go with longer ones to compensate my lack of reach? I'd like to keep this topic confined to medieval as that's my favorite time period. But I do love the gladius, rapier and various renaissance swords Also I'd like to stick to the topic of swords, I know the best on a battlefield would be a polearm or ranged weapon of some kind lol. I think you would be on the taller side compared to people who actually wielded swords back in the day.
|
|
|
Post by legacyofthesword on Sept 28, 2017 20:29:44 GMT
I have a friend who's about your height. I'm 6' 2", so I'll do some parring with him and see what happens. Honestly though, I'd say go for longer weapons no matter how tall you are, as long as they fit the terrain (pikes inside a house generally don't do too well).
|
|
|
Post by Faldarin on Sept 28, 2017 20:47:45 GMT
I would go with a longer weapon to compensate for reach. Very rarely would you need to worry about weapon length being an issue aside from confined spaces. If you're talking from a HEMA or just a 'swordfighting' stance - keep in mind that two handed weapons do hamper your reach a bit compared to singlehanders, and leave your hands and arms a little more open.
|
|
|
Post by spikeynorman47 on Sept 28, 2017 21:14:51 GMT
I'm quite a short fellow(5ft 8in), shortest of my friends except one. Would the "best" strategy for me to be go with smaller swords, like a messer? Or go with longer ones to compensate my lack of reach? I'd like to keep this topic confined to medieval as that's my favorite time period. But I do love the gladius, rapier and various renaissance swords Also I'd like to stick to the topic of swords, I know the best on a battlefield would be a polearm or ranged weapon of some kind lol. I think you would be on the taller side compared to people who actually wielded swords back in the day. I know but I'm fighting people today mostly everyone I'm around is taller than me.
|
|
|
Post by spikeynorman47 on Sept 28, 2017 21:15:09 GMT
I have a friend who's about your height. I'm 6' 2", so I'll do some parring with him and see what happens. Honestly though, I'd say go for longer weapons no matter how tall you are, as long as they fit the terrain (pikes inside a house generally don't do too well). Cool thanks!
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 28, 2017 21:49:09 GMT
I think you would be on the taller side compared to people who actually wielded swords back in the day. I know but I'm fighting people today mostly everyone I'm around is taller than me. Taller, with longer weapons is generally an advantage for sure, but I was pointing out that if they (often scarcely over 5') were swinging the big blades...so can you. So I would choose the largest steel I could handle comfortably.
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Sept 28, 2017 21:57:57 GMT
I'm not a fan of using larger two-handed weapons for a couple of reasons, namely that they tire you out more quickly and that they are less agile. I'm only an inch taller than you and while I find a longer weapon to offer some advantages (especially poking at opponents), having shorter weapons just works better for me and I can focus on closing in and making the opponent's long weapon disadvantageous to them. I'm not some giant over six feet in height, so trying to fight like one with a larger weapon doesn't work as well for me as grabbing a pair of 27-29" blades (katana for me) and closing in.
If you're only using one weapon, a single handed sword offers the advantages Faldarin mentioned, namely that you have greater freedom of movement when using only one hand and that with weapons like rapier in particular you can close an insane amount of distance with a very quick movement. But sticking with European medieval style weapons, and only using one of them, I'd pick a thrust oriented hand and a half sword, something with dimensions like the Hanwei Albrecht II that has a good length (blade is 35") and can be used effectively with one hand or two depending on context.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Sept 28, 2017 22:19:14 GMT
I'm 5 10 and I usually like sabre, So not the the same as messer (I did do lingsword though, And in that I liked 32 blade length of inches) and usually go for 30 to 36 inches.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Sept 28, 2017 22:24:18 GMT
What context? In most competitive sparring you'll be using essentially identical weapons. Beyond that it's really a question of tactics more than sword design.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 28, 2017 23:54:39 GMT
I'm not a fan of using larger two-handed weapons for a couple of reasons, namely that they tire you out more quickly and that they are less agile. I'm only an inch taller than you and while I find a longer weapon to offer some advantages (especially poking at opponents), having shorter weapons just works better for me and I can focus on closing in and making the opponent's long weapon disadvantageous to them. I'm not some giant over six feet in height, so trying to fight like one with a larger weapon doesn't work as well for me as grabbing a pair of 27-29" blades (katana for me) and closing in. If you're only using one weapon, a single handed sword offers the advantages Faldarin mentioned, namely that you have greater freedom of movement when using only one hand and that with weapons like rapier in particular you can close an insane amount of distance with a very quick movement. But sticking with European medieval style weapons, and only using one of them, I'd pick a thrust oriented hand and a half sword, something with dimensions like the Hanwei Albrecht II that has a good length (blade is 35") and can be used effectively with one hand or two depending on context. I'm assuming that your meaning larger two-handed swords and not spears/polearms, etc..., in which case your reasoning is sound if that longer sword cannot be wielded with one hand (in other words, it must be lighter weight).
|
|
|
Post by Croccifixio on Sept 29, 2017 3:31:07 GMT
There's something I discovered when cutting, and that is the distance of the blade to the ground. A blade that's too long is a little difficult to keep off the ground unless you're just stabbing with it or cutting at a more or less 45 degree angle (or horizontally). But vertical cuts or diagonal cuts that are higher than 45 degrees are more difficult to control and prevent from hitting the ground unless you step with it properly and have proper form for rotating your arms (something easy to say but takes time to train). So I'm an advocate of finding the right length - the maximum length - you can use without endangering your sword or your foot. At 5'10, I find any blade above 40 inches gets way too hard to control, so I much prefer the 35-37 inchers to have some margin for error.
|
|
|
Post by spikeynorman47 on Sept 29, 2017 4:47:10 GMT
There's something I discovered when cutting, and that is the distance of the blade to the ground. A blade that's too long is a little difficult to keep off the ground unless you're just stabbing with it or cutting at a more or less 45 degree angle (or horizontally). But vertical cuts or diagonal cuts that are higher than 45 degrees are more difficult to control and prevent from hitting the ground unless you step with it properly and have proper form for rotating your arms (something easy to say but takes time to train). So I'm an advocate of finding the right length - the maximum length - you can use without endangering your sword or your foot. At 5'10, I find any blade above 40 inches gets way too hard to control, so I much prefer the 35-37 inchers to have some margin for error. I've had the same issue using longswords. I tend to hit the ground if I'm trying to move with my swings. So I'm assuming from what everyone's saying here, that maybe for me a 1 handed sword is better? Like arming sword/messer/falchion? Because I can't fight fire with fire because I'm not bigger/taller. Right?
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Sept 29, 2017 19:36:45 GMT
I'm not a fan of using larger two-handed weapons for a couple of reasons, namely that they tire you out more quickly and that they are less agile. I'm only an inch taller than you and while I find a longer weapon to offer some advantages (especially poking at opponents), having shorter weapons just works better for me and I can focus on closing in and making the opponent's long weapon disadvantageous to them. I'm not some giant over six feet in height, so trying to fight like one with a larger weapon doesn't work as well for me as grabbing a pair of 27-29" blades (katana for me) and closing in. If you're only using one weapon, a single handed sword offers the advantages Faldarin mentioned, namely that you have greater freedom of movement when using only one hand and that with weapons like rapier in particular you can close an insane amount of distance with a very quick movement. But sticking with European medieval style weapons, and only using one of them, I'd pick a thrust oriented hand and a half sword, something with dimensions like the Hanwei Albrecht II that has a good length (blade is 35") and can be used effectively with one hand or two depending on context. I'm assuming that your meaning larger two-handed swords and not spears/polearms, etc..., in which case your reasoning is sound if that longer sword cannot be wielded with one hand (in other words, it must be lighter weight). Yep, my phrasing was unintentionally ambiguous, meant larger two handed swords. Can't hate on spears. They're the "king of weapons" for a reason.
|
|
|
Post by spikeynorman47 on Sept 29, 2017 19:42:30 GMT
Would sword and buckler be more ideal than longsword for a shorter person maybe?
|
|
|
Post by Faldarin on Sept 29, 2017 19:50:48 GMT
Would sword and buckler be more ideal than longsword for a shorter person maybe? I would say that it's possible. A saber or arming sword/buckler... or a full viking shield/viking sword combo. All three of these have some decent advantages for a shorter person. I'm certainly not fast enough for sword-buckler or probably saber. Though, good sword and buckler fighters are always impressive to me, to watch. I don't generally have problems with a longsword until the blade length gets over 36", or the overall length gets over 48" or so... that's when I start to have problems (at 5'10").
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Sept 29, 2017 19:54:38 GMT
There's something I discovered when cutting, and that is the distance of the blade to the ground. A blade that's too long is a little difficult to keep off the ground unless you're just stabbing with it or cutting at a more or less 45 degree angle (or horizontally). But vertical cuts or diagonal cuts that are higher than 45 degrees are more difficult to control and prevent from hitting the ground unless you step with it properly and have proper form for rotating your arms (something easy to say but takes time to train). So I'm an advocate of finding the right length - the maximum length - you can use without endangering your sword or your foot. At 5'10, I find any blade above 40 inches gets way too hard to control, so I much prefer the 35-37 inchers to have some margin for error. I've had the same issue using longswords. I tend to hit the ground if I'm trying to move with my swings. So I'm assuming from what everyone's saying here, that maybe for me a 1 handed sword is better? Like arming sword/messer/falchion? Because I can't fight fire with fire because I'm not bigger/taller. Right? I guess a fun way of putting it might be to fight fire with water and extinguish it. If you use something that's tailored to your strengths your opponent will have a rough time combating your use of the weapon, especially if they're inexperienced with it. So there would be a bit of a mind game at work if your sparring partner is overly familiar with the longsword and not very familiar with your weapon. Strategic poking with an arming sword during a longsword wielder's wind-up during movements is a sure way to catch the longsword user off guard and close in for a strike. Any weapon that keeps you light on your feet and capable of controlling distance and space is desirable, so an arming sword and a buckler would be great for this. Or if you really want to mess with your opponent, use a messer in your left hand rather than a buckler. Hardly anyone practices that and the combination of weapons offers versatile techniques
|
|
|
Post by spikeynorman47 on Sept 29, 2017 20:01:55 GMT
I've had the same issue using longswords. I tend to hit the ground if I'm trying to move with my swings. So I'm assuming from what everyone's saying here, that maybe for me a 1 handed sword is better? Like arming sword/messer/falchion? Because I can't fight fire with fire because I'm not bigger/taller. Right? I guess a fun way of putting it might be to fight fire with water and extinguish it. If you use something that's tailored to your strengths your opponent will have a rough time combating your use of the weapon, especially if they're inexperienced with it. So there would be a bit of a mind game at work if your sparring partner is overly familiar with the longsword and not very familiar with your weapon. Strategic poking with an arming sword during a longsword wielder's wind-up during movements is a sure way to catch the longsword user off guard and close in for a strike. Any weapon that keeps you light on your feet and capable of controlling distance and space is desirable, so an arming sword and a buckler would be great for this. Or if you really want to mess with your opponent, use a messer in your left hand rather than a buckler. Hardly anyone practices that and the combination of weapons offers versatile techniques I see what you're saying. I do love using sword buckler/heater shield alot. I do love the longsword though, I was just curious if there's a "better" weapon out there for shorties like me I know it's irrelevant because I wont be fighting for my life with these anymore but I still think it's a fun discussion. Thanks for your input tho! I got some great information/opinions on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Sept 29, 2017 20:10:21 GMT
The best weapon of course being a bag full of pommels for throwing lol. Which introduces the idea of incorporating throwing techniques into the mix (short swords, knives, etc.) so now a whole other spectrum of weaponry could be experimented with, having a dagger to projectile at the opponent would be a great way of playing the range game. Deviating from just blades, I can only imagine how bad of a day a longsword would have against a combination of arming sword and flail...
|
|
|
Post by howler on Oct 2, 2017 7:47:41 GMT
Would sword and buckler be more ideal than longsword for a shorter person maybe? I've seen YouTube videos and read some stuff where, in one on one duels, they go into the bind (swords contacting) then stab the opponent with a twisting thrust, in two handed short spear fashion. I think this is what makes the versatile longsword most deadly.
|
|