He is the only sword youtuber who isn't talking out

File: Mini_12.png (56KB, 256x251px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 256x251px

>>33514042
Yes. That I am aware of.

>>33514042
Pretty much, decent combination of historical and practical applications of old timey weapons.

>>33514042

No, he thinks that a quarterstaff is not more deadly than a sword

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

London Longsword is good too
Metatron knows his yowowees too, but he hates women

Him and Knyght Errant

Metatron is another okay one but I can't stand his voice

Lindy, Skal, etc. are all charlatants who don't know shit

>>33514553
>Metatron is another okay one but I can't stand his voice
holo nowbel juans today i will be talking to you about hungarian pronunciation... FUSSHH WUSHH WAHHH... METATATRON

>>33514504
That's because he's right. A quarterstaff is not deadlier than a sword. Swords have edges and points that have more killing potential.

The quarterstaff is a good weapon, has a lot of reach, and hits hard, but it's not going to kill you instantly unless it's a well-placed strike to the head and maybe neck. You might as well use an actual pole weapon like a spear if you want killing power. A quarterstaff seems better suited for carrying as a civilian or during regular, daily life.

>>33514518
>LondonLongsword
Yes, he's good, but it'd be nice if he posted more videos.

>Metatron
I cringe every time I watch him.

>Skallagrim
I like most of his videos, but sometimes he can be a bit weird.

>Academy of Historical Fencing
Nick seems to know what he's talking about and usually posts sparring videos that are fun to watch.

>Shadiversity
Kind of annoying, but mostly tolerable.

>Lindybeige
Mostly entertainment value. He's not always right, but overall good content.

>>33514553
Knyght Errant is pretty awesome if you're more interested in history and context than actual sword fighting. Plus his wife is great.

>>33514504
you just earned him another subscriber. and you're an idiot.

>>33514553
Skall at least tells when he's going to go into retarded speculation and admits that he isn't an expert. The dumb shit he says sometimes is forgivable because he frames it as a nonexpert opinion. Lindy on the other hand asserts everything he says as if it were true.

>>33515079
I wish he would post more videos. If he needs to keep them slow to keep the quality up so be it. I'm just afraid he'll quit due to not being able to make videos and do his job.

>>33514504
Hello, Silver.

>>33514553
At least skall always says
>Hey I'm not an expert this is just my thoughts
and I ignore any content of his that isn't about weapons
I didn't like Metatron's voice at first but it grew on me and I like him more now

can confirm that he talks out of his mouth.

>>33514642
>Academy of Historical Fencing
This. I very rarely see anyone mention this channel but Nick puts up quality content

>>33514553
I want to punch self important know-it-all faggots like lindy.

Skall has the decency to admit when he was being retarded and has retracted past statements.

OP's guy actually gives good and rational advice eloquently.

File: staphococci epinephrine or something like that.jpg (138KB, 973x1390px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 973x1390px

>>33515429
>>33514593
these guys don't get it.

if a staff guy fights a guy with a sword, sword guy dies. It's embarrassing but true

File: Let me tell you about swordsmanship.gif (1MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x180px

I like how Mat is getting more and more comfortable with the camera. Lately he is getting wild with the innuendoes, it's great.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxuB8uIiEY0

>>33521653
>All the butt innuendos when he starts talking about the use of a rifle's buttstock as a weapon

It's great

>>33514642
>>Lindybeige
>Mostly entertainment value. He's not always right, but overall good content.
He's rarely right

There is only one sword person you should be watching on Jewtube motherfucker
https://youtu.be/pfOAgKA7h7g

>>33521617
They're not talking about who would win in an armed duel/fight, they're talking about sheer killing potential of an unarmored target.

Sword = Just push the pointy end at the guy's midsection and he's done.
Staff = Build momentum with a leveraged swing, aimed at a crucial part of the body, and the guy's usually done.

When you translate this into a fight, taking into account parrying and blocking ability, and draw it out over time, with many hits/swings in the duel, the quarterstaff would be a better dueling weapon overall and win 9 times out of 10. If you've watched Easton's videos, he readily admits this. He has no sword bias, other than the fact that he likes European backswords with hand protection, and even then, he will openly admit the drawbacks of his favorite swords vs. other weapons.

But at the end of the day, if you're looking at death-potential-per-swing vs. a vulnerable target, the sword will always be deadlier due to its nature.

>>33514642
>>Shadiversity
>Kind of annoying, but mostly tolerable.
He's been getting more annoying for me lately. In general, he can put out interesting videos, but holy fuck is he ever an arrogant know-it-all with a massive ego. His videos and attitude make it seem like he thinks he knows everything and has an incredibly unwarranted sense of self-worth. Remember that he's a person who doesn't actually train HEMA, do historical research, and bases most of his opinions on LARPing, computer models, and wooden swords he's built. Some of his videos are downright insufferable. The best example being the series he made about how the most formal martial arts training he's ever had was getting a yellow belt in Tae Kwon Do, but he's qualified to talk about things like an expert because he read a few Bruce Lee quotes. And no, I'm not really exaggerating. What makes it even funnier is his hilariously bad sparring videos posted in defense of his prowess.

>>33514042
LondonLongsword is decent too, but what he teaches isn't really in my realm of interest.
I like SG's vids.
Metatron has a couple of good vids but by god is he an autistic cringelord
I like Skallagrim's testing videos, not so much his autismo videos.
Shad again has a couple of good vids but is generally annoying.
KnyghtErrant is excellent, but is armour, not really weapons, then again most on this list aren't dedicated to weapons.
Lindybeige is 50/50 imo

>>33521617

Not in 5e faggot I'll hit you four times for 2d6+5 plus any magic nonsense and then ACTION SURGE for another four 2d6+5 attacks.

>>33523455
If he has a staff he could be a wizard

>>33523526

Exactly the point. There's this godawful tendency on /tg/ (and I blame Pathfinder for it) for people to discuss DnD as if 3.5 was still relevant. It's not. 5e fixed the combat disparity where a "clever" Wizard with the right spell could end pretty much any fight immediately, and Fighter is arguably the best class for straight-up combat face-to-face, but because Wizardfags want to feel superior and Fighterfags want to whine about how they deserve more it frequently goes unaddressed and the goalposts shift straight into "well, Wizards are more useful out of combat."

>>33523179
>unprotected hands and a weapon that's awkward up close and needs a hit to a vulnerable point with lots of momentum to finish things
>versus protected hands, a weapon that's wieldy up close and can be swung with one handed, and furthermore can kill you with one halfway decent hit and will otherwise painfully bleed you with a shitty hit

Doubt.jpg

>>33522869
>He's rarely right
Make that basically never

>>33523179
I love my quarterstaff, but I'd take a sword any day. In a fight you're gonna have trouble getting in a powerful enough swing and connecting with the staff, as the sword guy will parry it away and try to close distance, also damaging your staff every time you attack until your staff breaks.

You can't run someone through with a staff, only bonk their face to death, swords are more versatile.

People used swords for a reason, not just because they look cool.

>>33514042
What video is that from? That happens to be the style of sword I'm fond of. I think it's a bastard sword?

>>33523926
>swinging with your staff
>not using the superior reach of your weapon
learn to use the weapon you claim to love

>>33524047
That's the Albion Ringeck, it's a longsword

>>33523926
How the fuck is someone going to hack your quarter staff up without blunting their sword

>>33514642
>cringes at Megatron
>but doesn't cringe at Skall
You okay, man?

>>33524380
Huh. Seems autocorrect doesn't recognize Metatron but does have Megatron in its dictionary. Who would have thought.

>>33523729
I'm convinced that he's basically trolling and his delivery is so smooth that we will not have confirmation until the posthumous publication of his memoirs

>>33524303
It's literally wood
Sword blades aren't made of glass, they will hold an edge well unless you start wailing on hard surfaces like metal. They will even hold an edge after blade on blade contact, maybe with some nicks.

>>33524084
Do you know how useless thrusting a blunt object is when thrusts are so easy to defend against?
Are you going to piss them off to death?

>>33521653
>Lately he is getting wild with the innuendoes, it's great.
Dude loves penetration. There's nothing wrong with that. The deeper the better. And you have to appreciate anyone who knows how to use the butt effectively, but recognizes that a nice, meaty cutlass is probably a more effective weapon.

>>33524528
Still not as bad as Skallagrim. Whats the context for the image?

>>33514553
>>33515845
>>33516958

What shit does Skall get wrong???>>33519025

>>33524601
Stuff like all swords need a bunch of hand protection, or you should never have a sword with a round handle for cutting

https://youtu.be/hqAHji6zNf4

>>33524654
Swords SHOULD have hand protection and oval shaped handles though

>>33524549
http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/armour/hoplite/hoplshld.html

>>33515079
>>33515878
My niggas, he really is an awesome super humble guy, like the Ian of the armor world that is also named Ian.
>also swim test when

>>33521717
If you want to avoid deep penetration, don't charge in butt first!

>>33524836
Don't forget to grip the right part of the shaft.

>>33524864
good thing bayonets are usually tilted away from the muzzle, since you don't want to stab your hands when moving them up and down

>>33524901
Unintended penetration is always inconvenient. Definitely not something you want to happen when ramming a charge down your barrel.

>>33524923
smooth spear shafts are almost always better because you can run your hands up and down much smoother

>>33524696
Different anon here, what is wrong with the image?

>>33524693
Except that's not necessary for all styles of swordsmanship and that's proof because there are tons of examples of swords throughout history that did not have a ton of hand protection and did have round handles despite being designed for cutting

>>33524145
Thank you sir.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsBbd3QJ-IT2g8kSvq3r3RA

>>33525258
And none of those cultures ever were worth shit, your point?

>>33525747
Rome wasn't worth shit

>>33524461
Wood isn't made of glass either. It takes maybe 3 or 4 good strikes to break one, and that's with the staff being held down. In combat where everything's moving, you're more likely to just nick the thing.

>>33524478
Just because something isn't lethal doesn't mean it's useless. Not to mention that it's harder to parry something heavier with more leverage than your sword.

Between trained users, quarterstaff beats sword, period. This isn't even a question.

The relative "stopping power" of each is an academic and irrelevant distinction, when one so solidly defeats the other in a real fight.

>>33526051
if that's the case, why were swords ever invented?

>>33526117
Because swords are the best side arm you could possibly have

>>33526162
Just carry a big stick. they're cheaper and deadlier. why ever have a sword? why spend as much $ for a weapon as you would a house when you could just carry a much deadlier and free stick? didn't you just say that sticks are deadlier than swords?

>>33526228
Swords weren't that fucking expensive. Not basic ones at least. They were common. Even Matt Easton says this, and according to this thread he's pretty great when it comes to this. Swords were a sidearm. Meant to be used when your other weapon is no longer advantageous. If your spear breaks somehow, or is lost, you pull your sword. You're probably gonna die but at least you have something. They were easier to carry than a second spear because obviously it's much fucking shorter.

>>33526117
They're handier than a big fucking stick. You can wear one all day by your side. There's more craftsmanship and expense involved so it gradually turned into a status+fashion symbol as well.

Polearms are just big fucking sticks. Stick an axe on the end, it's a halberd. Stick a hook on the end, it's a bill. Stick assorted shit on it, it's a pollaxe. Make the stick extra fucking long, it's a pike.

A simple big stick, the quarterstaff, moves faster than all of the above, and is an excellent defensive weapon.

Turns out... big sticks are fucking awesome melee weapons.

Spears AKA a sharp stick are still extant in the form of bayonets, while swords are extinct on the battlefield.

>>33526228
Supply and demand. Swords have basically always been affordable because the more people needed them the more people were willing to make them. Maybe not /good/ swords, but it doesn't take much to fuck up a fragile human's limbs or something. Any local blacksmith would have been able to hammer out a blade, fit a handle on it and sharpen the thing well enough to do damage. When good steel was rare and expensive you'd get cheap swords made of crap material, later when metallurgy was more understood and global trade developed, you had almost assembly line style production where one shop would specialize in forging blades and knock out as many as they could in a day, and then cart them over to the shop that does the grinding to finish, then cart them over to the cutler to put the handle on, and stick it in one of the scabbards from the last delivery by the leatherworkers.

And swords don't really wear out. If you get a nicer sword, you sell your old one for cheap, and that might have been how you got it in the first place so there are multiple generation old blades in circulation that are just considered old and not that valuable, maybe they broke the tip off and were reforged or something, but the number of swords will grow a lot faster than the number of people looking for swords. It would probably have been a purchase much more comparable to a motorcycle or something nowadays. You can spend 5 years salary on one if you want, but you can also pick up someone's rusted out dirtbike for a couple weeks of beer money if all you care about is the price.

File: paradox_pike.gif (9KB, 371x552px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 371x552px

>>33523926
>>33523179
>>33524478

From John Silver's "Paradoxes of Defense":
">The Short Staffe is most commonly the best weapon of all other, although other weapons may be more offensive, and especially against many weapons together, by reason of his nimbleness and swift motions, and is not much inferior to the Forest Bille, although the Forest Bille be more offensive, the Short Staffe will prove the better weapon."

People are massively underestimating the crazy amount of momentum that a quarterstaff swing generates. You know how baseball bats and batons break bones easily? Quarterstaffs hit waay harder than that.

A single hit to the skull, shin, or arm *will* break bones, and the quarterstaff has the range to hit anywhere from head to toe while a swordsman is still closing. What's more, with all that momentum in a quarterstaff swing, a swordsman can't even really parry from the strong--their only real hope is to half-sword. So the quarterstaff user can turn the swordsman's foot-to-knee area into bone paste pretty much with impunity.

>>33526117
>if that's the case, why were swords ever invented?

Sword and shield is an extremely effective combination for lightly-armored formation fighting. You and your front-line can just bum-rush a bunch of spearmen and those of you who survive the initial push can clean up pretty easily.

Also in most cultures swords became a status symbol/fashion accessory for rich people who wanted everybody to know they were rich and tough.

>>33514042

>Belegarth player here
>Been playing for about 7 years now.
>Closet thing your going to get to medevil warfare to date.

Alot of that shit you see is basically kids hitting each other with sticks.
Its much less known the organized side of the warfare society.

and from first hand experience i will tell you , pole arm, halbard, staff, pike trump sword every single time.
>1v1
>Group on group
>Column vs column

Its gotten to the point where warfare is fought with like 3 groups of pikemen / shields and 2 groups of archers on each battlefield
because its IS the superior tactic and a overall better weapon.

>Id put money down right now
>That i could womp anyone in this thread so far with my polearm vs their sword
>Period hands down

In almost any sort of combat from open field, to narrow hallways, reach wins, reach with a pointy stick on the end, wins..
You dont need force, you dont blunt, quick fast movements that are easy to control and parry win over the lumber that is the sword.

>>33526911
>john silver
He's a master fencer but he's not exactly the only treatise author and plenty of people disagreed with his ideas.

A quarter staff shouldnt be underestimated but its not exactly the perfect weapon

File: polearm2.jpg (82KB, 756x890px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 756x890px

>>33526991
I was mostly trying to make a point that quarterstaff fans aren't necessarily just speaking as keyboard warriors talking out of their ass.

But yeah. If you have a long haft, you might as well put something pointy at the end. Billhook is best weapon

>>33526979
Going off of medieval Europe as a reference, it looks like you guys are using shield sizes that would have been popular when the legs and feet were covered with chainmail at least. The idea for an irl historical sword-and-shield fighter is that everything not protected by a shield is going to be armored (maybe even just kite shield + helmet + greaves), which lets them close in relative safety, shove their shield in the spearman's face, and wreck their shit with the sword. It's apparently effective because everybody was using it.

(I mean not everybody could afford armor. Those people are better off using spears like you say)

Why can't I just grab the spear by the shaft after parrying the head with my sword, then pull my body behind the point?

quarterstaff stronk!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPDumKHfMSY

>>33527752
What makes you think you're going to have more pulling leverage with one hand than a guy using two?

>>33527752
it is incredibly difficult to grab something like that in a way that actually gives you any real degree of control over it. The other guy has a firm, twohanded grip and generally a solid stance with lots of leverage. You're off balance from having avoided a thurst, can only grab it with one hand, and probably your off hand at that because you need to hold your weapon still.

You can test it pretty easily with a broom handle. If the guy with the "spear" is reasonably strong, he will either be able to wrench it out of your grip or ram you in the gut 9 times out of 10.
Obviously either person being trained and actually knowing what to do would make a huge difference, but the advantage definitely goes to spear guy.

>>33527752
That's what you want to do, but it's much easier to say that than do it.

If the person is stronger than you, he's got two hands on the shaft and you have one. He pulls back hard and suddenly you've fucked up your hand because you just ran it across a spearhead

>>33527752
A lot of reasons...

a) The point of a spear travels VERY fast. You can be thrusted 2-3 times in succession at multiple targets on your body in the time it takes you to carry out a parry->close->grab.

b) single-handed parries can often fail, simply due to the mass and momentum and leverage of spear/staff thrusts and blows

c) just like there's half-swording with longsword... there are huge numbers of "half-staff" techniques, where you can shift your grip on the spear/staff and do all kinds of buttstrokes, strikes with the middle of the haft, and grappling moves against somebody trying to close on you

quarterstaff stronk!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC4f_uAgwYU