christain
Member
It's the steel on the inside that counts.
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by christain on Oct 30, 2019 11:45:01 GMT
As much as I would cheer for the Great Sword, I think the quarterstaff would have an overall advantage in speed and mobility. The quarterstaff guy could poke and jab the whole time the Great Sword guy is recovering from his first swing. Big swords like that aren't weapons of great finesse. They're meant to do a lot of damage in one swing. The quarterstaff guy can do about 5 motions to the sword guys one motion...if he's good.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Oct 30, 2019 13:13:04 GMT
My only concern would be the relative fragility of the staff. And are we talking armored or unarmored combat? But my money would be on the staff in an unarmored bout.
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Oct 30, 2019 13:47:45 GMT
Sword! (This is a sword forum)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2019 14:24:03 GMT
Sword! (This is a sword forum) Best point here
|
|
|
Post by leviathansteak on Oct 30, 2019 14:47:48 GMT
Greatsword for sure.
The potential to wound is far higher and easier to achieve with a greatsword. All skills equivalent, id give the match to the sword 8 or 9 times out of 10.
With sufficient skill it would definitely be possible for the quarterstaff to win i guess
And a greatsword is not slow if you use it right. Against a single opponent you'd primarily use it like a short spear, with quick thrusts and opportunistic cuts. You don't wanna swing wildly in the stereotypical manner against one guy.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Oct 30, 2019 16:11:49 GMT
Well technically a quarterstaff is a simulator for a sword or at least thats the vibe George Silver gives in PoD. I think Silver meant to say that the short staff (around 8 to 9 feet length) is to be used much like the two-handed sword, but is a uniterable weapon nonetheless. In chapter 26 of PoD he goes on to say: "Now for the vantage of the short staff against the sword and buckler, sword & target, two handed sword, single sword, sword and dagger, or rapier and poniard, there is no great question to be in any of these weapons.
Whensoever any blow or thrust shall be strongly made with the staff, they are ever in false place, in the carriage of the wards, for if at any of these six weapons he carries his ward high & strong for his head, as of necessity he must carry it very high, otherwise it will be too weak to defend a blow being strongly made at the head, then will his space be too wide, in due time to break the thrust from his body. Again, if he carries his ward lower, thereby to be in equal space for readiness to break both blow & thrust, then in that place his ward is too low, and too weak to defend the blow of the staff: for the blow being strongly made at the head upon that ward, will beat down the ward and his head together, and put him in great danger of his life. And here is to be noted, that if he fights well, the staff man strikes but at the head, and thrusts presently under at the body. And if a blow is first made, a thrust follows, and if a thrust is first made, a blow follows, and in doing of any of them, the one breeds the other. So that however any of these six weapons shall carry his ward strongly to defend the first, he shall be too far in space to defend the second, whether it be blow or thrust.
Yet again for the short staff: the short staff has the vantage against the battle axe, black bill, or halberd: the short staff has the advantage, by reason of the nimbleness and length: he will strike and thrust freely, and in better and swifter time than can the battle axe, black bill, or halberd, and by reason of his judgement, distance and time, fight safe. And this resolve upon, the short staff is the best weapon against all manner of weapons, the forest bill excepted."
So Silver basically says that in a non-battlefield situation (unarmored) the staff is the best weapon to have (except the forest bill, and if having enough space).
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Oct 30, 2019 17:31:18 GMT
I don't know, the montonte guys and gals I've seen have plenty of grace and finesse. The blades move very, very quickly and stay moving very quickly. They aren't the huge lumbering pieces of steel sometimes imagined.
|
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,625
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Oct 30, 2019 18:30:00 GMT
It really depends on a few different factors.
Are there specific guidelines for the size and composition of the staff and sword for this match-up?
There are some pretty large staves, and I have one with bronze mace heads at each end.
Great sword is a descriptor with a relatively large amount of variation. Are we talking hand-and-a-half greatsword, or proper two-hander?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2019 18:51:41 GMT
Silver's two hander has the same blade length as his single handed sword.
As with any hypothetical match up.
It depends.
Stephen Hand described exactly that in discussions and the last of a several page discussion between dagger vs pole arm as being inconclusive.
fwiw
|
|
|
Post by Adventurer'sBlade on Oct 30, 2019 19:13:01 GMT
A greatsword will have a point of balance much closer to your hands than a staff, unless you choke up and sacrifice range, so I would wonder if a robust quarterstaff is actually more agile. The weight difference is not huge.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Oct 30, 2019 19:14:42 GMT
In his staff/polearms section Joachim Meyer (1570) describes a similar tactic to what Silver mentions. Alternating, strong but simple hews and thrusts, however with shorter staffs (somewhat short of 7 feet, perhaps). He calls this “Treiben”, which means something like “chasing”. Hew from above, thrust back up. We tried this in drills with perhaps 70%. Very, very hard to defend against. The quickness and power of the long lever at the back (wide gripping space) and overall length instantly puts you on the defensive, even with a long two handed sword. Meyer also describes “pulling” the strikes, which means a short break of rhythm, either by
a) slowing down the strike for a moment to let the opponent’s weapon pass by the line that needs to be closed and thus creating a new opening on the other side or b) deliberately pulling one’s strike somewhat short, to meet the opponent’s weapon somewhat more towards the foible, thus displacing it a bit, just to strike again at another place.
This is a very offensive tactic, and very effective especially against shorter weapons that need to strike mainly towards your hands/arms or via riposte with footwork, due to lack of (comparable) reach (such as the greatsword in this case).
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Oct 30, 2019 19:15:26 GMT
A greatsword will have a point of balance much closer to your hands than a staff, unless you choke up and sacrifice range, so I would wonder if a robust quarterstaff is actually more agile. The weight difference is not huge. The staff's advantage (especially if of Silver's "perfect length") is huge, in an open space.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Oct 30, 2019 20:40:28 GMT
Stephen Hand described exactly that in discussions and the last of a several page discussion between dagger vs pole arm as being inconclusive. fwiw Do you have a link to that, by any chance?
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Oct 30, 2019 22:05:30 GMT
It's much like greatsword vs spear: sbg-sword-forum.forums.net/thread/55517/greatsword-spearexcept much safer for greatsword. Staff needs to be significantly longer than the sword. Against a 6' greatsword, you want an 8' staff; against a 5' greatsword, a 7' staff would do. With 2 feet more length, I'd favour staff. Equal lengths, sword.
|
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,625
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Oct 30, 2019 22:20:20 GMT
I think the right staff doesn't need a significant reach advantage to hold it's own against a greatsword. Being able to slide one's hands to rapidly change weapon reach and leverage is a big advantage in favor of the staff. A dense wood like hickory is not likely to take much damage against a greatsword blade, and metal end caps can increase the damage dealing potential closer to parity with the sword.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Oct 30, 2019 23:16:03 GMT
IMO... Armored fight would go to greatsword. It can slide into crevices etc. Staff vs armor would only leave a dent or three before getting killed.
Unarmored, staff.
But of course we can ask...what armor?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2019 23:22:59 GMT
Stephen Hand described exactly that in discussions and the last of a several page discussion between dagger vs pole arm as being inconclusive. fwiw Do you have a link to that, by any chance? It was on Netsword sometime around 2006. I might find it in time via archive.org but it wouldn't be on the top of any of my own lists.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2019 23:23:03 GMT
I think the right staff doesn't need a significant reach advantage to hold it's own against a greatsword. Being able to slide one's hands to rapidly change weapon reach and leverage is a big advantage in favor of the staff. A dense wood like hickory is not likely to take much damage against a greatsword blade, and metal end caps can increase the damage dealing potential closer to parity with the sword. Weren't greatswords used to cut through pikes?
|
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,625
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Oct 30, 2019 23:29:24 GMT
I think the right staff doesn't need a significant reach advantage to hold it's own against a greatsword. Being able to slide one's hands to rapidly change weapon reach and leverage is a big advantage in favor of the staff. A dense wood like hickory is not likely to take much damage against a greatsword blade, and metal end caps can increase the damage dealing potential closer to parity with the sword. Weren't greatswords used to cut through pikes? Greatswords cutting through pike hafts is mostly unsubstantiated speculation, and pike staves were not historically made of hickory.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2019 23:46:24 GMT
Weren't greatswords used to cut through pikes? Greatswords cutting through pike hafts is mostly unsubstantiated speculation, and pike staves were not historically made of hickory. I've always thought it sounded slightly far fetched tbh. Wood isn't that easy to cut through and they dont have such a strong hold that it wouldn't give form force
|
|