Are flails real weapons, /tg/? Shitty or not, if they're

>>50778897
I feel like you could have just googled this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flail_(weapon)

>>50778897
Judging by the fact that there’s precious little arguments about it, I'm guessing it's almost certainly a decent weapon, unlike axes, spears, swords and anything else /tg/ says is a shitty weapon.

Flails are real. I own a few because they are really good for precise blows and take advantage of leverage and momentum if you wind them up. I have them because I read that they would be really good against zombies so I have them to use in case of a real-life zombie apocalypse.

They were certainly used, but in which quantity and how effective they were is questionable.

>>50778916
>Despite being very common in fictional works such as cartoons, films and role-playing games as the "quintessential medieval weapon," historical information about this type of flail is somewhat scarce. A few doubt they existed at all due to the number of pieces sitting in museums that turned out to be forgeries, as well as the unrealistic way they are depicted in art.

>>50778983
It is important to know that the lack of found flails is a good indication that it was a peasant weapon.

Rich people that wanted to crack skulls would invest in a mace, morning star or warhammer.

Just agricultural tools used in combat. It kills people, but it is still a bad weapon, not designed for war, only repurposed for war.

Similar to war scythes (scythe with the blade running in the same direction as the pole instead of at an awkward angle). You can kill people with them but you are still better off with a real spear.

File: calico 900.jpg (68KB, 650x433px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 650x433px

>>50778897
They were a real weapon. They were just shit-tier in actual battle so not many were made.

1000 years from now, people will be asking if things like pic related were real guns for the same reason.

The flail you're thinking of probably wasn't very common if it even existed, but they saw use in other cultures. The Mongols supposedly had a type of flail that was carried over into Russia, and some asian countries used sorts of flails. The most common one in Europe was a long handled two handed thing with a very short flail, though.

>>50779183
There's also a distinct lack of artistic representation, which is another hint that it may be more of a fantasy weapon. A good deal of the depictions we have of them are set in fantastic contexts, like the journeys of Alexander the Great. They probably existed, but only in very small numbers. They're popular for modern depictions because they're metal as hell.

File: Meteor_hammer_1.jpg (1MB, 3648x2736px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3648x2736px

Are these real? Or just a showy juggling thing?

>>50779431
Well, they certainly are real objects, and a trained person really can spin them around at dangerous speeds and slam them into things, but the chance of them being serious weapons is low.

the one-handed flail was likely specialist weapons for cracking people wearing mail and using shields

the 2-handed flail was a well-documentd weapon during peasant revolts however

>>50779431
Most shaolin/kung fu "weapons" are purely for show."

>>50778897
Pretty sure one-handed flails were not a thing, they've found like one of them ever, and they cant imagine how it would be useful. Two-handed ones definitely were used though.

>>50779521
The meteor hammer is probably one of the more practical ones though, since you can make a functional one out of a knotted length of rope, and using it in short swings would make a good bludgeon. Better than not having a weapon at all, if all you've got is a length of rope.

>>50778942
There good at precise blows? whenever i think of a flail i think of it as the type of weapon you use when you just want to pummel something in general not something you use to hit something specific.

>>50779576
In the chaos of an actual fight and not a fancy dance show you're just as likely to crack your own skull with that as hurt the other guy.

>>50779603
Imagine a rotating flail head as it spins being for all intents and purposes a flat disc like a buzz-saw blade.

The chain will be shorter than the handle allowing you to keep the head orbiting around the end of the shaft at high speeds.

mastering keeping a spin on the flail allows you to simply intersect the "edge" of your hypothetical disc into whatever body-part you please, reaching around shields and delivering mauling wounds with the spikes and concussive blows with the mass of the head.

I wouldn't use one without a shield though.

>>50779659
That's why you use short swings and not the fancy martial art ones.

>>50779687
Or you could just use an actual weapon.

>>50779686
>Imagine a rotating flail head as it spins being for all intents and purposes a flat disc like a buzz-saw blade.
So imagine being the guy who has to wade into a formation by himself like a suicidal idiot because no one is going to want to be anywhere near the moron who is likely to kill his allies on accident?

Sounds more like an argument for why flails are shit weapons.

>>50779751
>well, an improvised meteor hammer can work as a weapon
>why don't you just use a real weapon
You... do know why someone might use an improvised weapon, right? Generally it's because you don't have a real weapon.

File: 1463015173406.png (136KB, 685x1000px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 685x1000px

That's not too bad of a drawback, since a lot of weapons weren't that great without a shield. I wouldn't try to block a hit with an axe or a mace, though I suppose you could use a spear like a quarterstaff.

>>50779183

Why would peasants use a specialised weapon, as opposed to something that could be used for utility (spear, axe, etc)

>>50779797
To be fair, if you're resorting to improvised weapons there's a laundry list of things that would be far more practical, easier to acquire, wield, and be more effective.

>>50779810
Because a two handed flail is literally one step away from a grain thresher (And that step is to start calling it a flail and not a grain thresher), and every peasant has access to grain threshers.

File: DisasterOfMari1266.jpg (1MB, 1317x909px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1317x909px

Reminder that 'rare' does not mean 'nonexistent.'
I'm sure I could find a few more old drawings, if you guys would be interested.

>Obligatory scholagladiatoria link
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGf7n7iUF_k

>>50779810
Two-handed flails were common as agricultural tools, a lot like the bill originally was an agricultural tool. A peasant would just pick up something vaguely weapon-like and go off to war, assuming their lord wasn't generous enough to equip them.

Axes might be another working tool turned weapon, or a pitchfork, but a spear is something that would be issued.

>>50779810
Flails were a farming implement.

>>50779833
Easier to acquire than a length of rope? I dunno about you, but rope is one of the most common things in my life.
And aside from that, this is in the context of kung-fu weapons. Of all of them, the meteor hammer is the most practical because you can improvise one in the amount of time it takes to tie a big knot.

>>50779856
>Axes might be another working tool turned weapon
While not unlikely keep in mind battle axes and wood cutting axes have entirely different geometries.

>>50779852
That's a medieval scharfescheisse...

>>50779866
Are you seriously saying that rope is more common for a Chinese peasant than lengths of wood and/or sharp farming implements? And that jury rigging a flail is more practical than just picking up and swinging around something blunt or sharp as it is?

Quit while you're ahead.

File: Arte_De_Athletica_2b for ants.jpg (12KB, 260x178px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 260x178px

>>50779892
Split hairs, if you must.

File: flail_flails_weapon_hussite_wars_b.jpg (129KB, 550x772px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 550x772px

>>50779884
Of course, but a pichfork is a lot different than most other polearms. I'm just saying if a peasant was pressed into his feudal obligations as part of a levy, and he didn't really have a weapon of his own, he might take a working tool like an axe or a thresher/flail.

>>50779927
Did I say "More practical than everything else you could pick up"? No, I didn't. It's more practical than other kung fu weapons. Stop creating strawmen.

>>50779866
>Of all of them, the meteor hammer is the most practical because you can improvise one in the amount of time it takes to tie a big knot.
Not even remotely. There's a number of staff weapons and other things that are literally farm tools.

>>50778897
An iron rod attached to a handle by a single link of chain would fulfill the function of the flail, without the risk of accidentally braining yourself or the dude next to you

>>50779992
Literally farm tools that are not common whatsoever. Rope is common. A specific kind of rake that was used in southwestern China 1000 years ago is not.

The typical 'fantasy flail' was indeed a real weapon, and we have historical evidence for its use.

It does not however appear to have been very popular, and seems to have been quite limited geographically.

>>50779996
You don't really get to benefit from the actual building of momentum in any meaningful way, then.

Ideally, if you have to be using a flail, you're gonna want at least 3 or so links in it just so you can get some good momentum going as you swing.

>>50780026
Seriously? We're talking about in the context of at the time and place when those things are common.

>>50780054
>We're talking about in the context of at the time and place when those things are common.
I'm not.

>>50779810

"Specialized" usually means it was either the weapon of a master, or a peasant. Usually a peasant. A lot of weapons are improvised from tools, and are generally the only thing the peasantry had available to them when it was time to form up and crack some heads.

Master weapons are rare and mostly used for show, since it'd be impractical to train up enough people to compete with just a bunch of thugs with clubs and sharpened poles.

>>50779603
I think he's saying that they're weapons that require precision and skill to use effectively.

The striking edge of a flail isn't aligned with your hand or your swing - if you're using the flail correctly, the head will be following behind the arc of your swing. It's this wrap-around action of the chain and head that lend the extra momentum to the blow that a typical, fixed head would not have. In order to use that effectively, you have to be able to "plan" where your opponent is going to be while he's in motion, even moreso than you would need to be with a fixed weapon because of the inherent delay of the hit.

Also, an advantage nobody seems to be bringing up about flails is that a chain of decent length is able to wrap up or around shield edges and strike the man behind it, especially when brought down overhead in a shield wall to crash into the skull.

>>50780075
Well then put the goalposts down and get with the program, because that's all anyone in this whole thread but apparently you and that idiot prattling about zombies earlier have been talking about this whole time.

>>50779791
>combat only happens in tight formations
... K.

>>50779802
I can sorta see a meteor hammer being effectively used as an entangling device as in the image, but I just can't imagine why somebody would use that instead of a net.

File: UZ0503_1_l.jpg (575KB, 2905x1413px) Image search: [Google]

575KB, 2905x1413px

>>50779996
There are versions more like that.

>>50779686
>Imagine a rotating flail head as it spins being for all intents and purposes a flat disc like a buzz-saw blade.
Except it stops dead the instant it hits something, and requires constant effort from the wielder to keep the spinning going. Poke it with your weapon, momentum gone, kill wielder before he winds it up again.

>>50780120
Don't talk about goalposts when you're the one interjecting new concepts.
All I ever said was that the hammer was more practical than other kung fu weapons because you can improvise one easily and it is a good bludgeon. You added every other kind of weapon and a specific time period to the conversation.

>>50780136
think about the amount of material required to make a large bola.

now think of the amount of material required to make a net capable of engulfing a human.

File: threshing wheat with flails.gif (129KB, 1024x675px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1024x675px

>>50780026
>>50779866
The problem here is you're assuming rope was as easy to make back then as it is now. Have you ever made rope by hand? It's not the fastest job.
Meanwhile, grabbing two sticks and a SHORT rope to put them together with is far faster. And cheaper. In a time and place when threshing wheat by hand was done ALL THE TIME, such tools were common.

>>50779866
I'm not sure I've ever seen actual rope in real life, not counting wound metal wires.

>>50780177
>Don't talk about goalposts when you're the one interjecting new concepts.
Uh, no. Sorry but this entire thread has been about period use of weapons. The only one interjecting new concepts, with every single one of your posts at that, has been you.

File: 1443488187354.jpg (471KB, 1223x1650px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 1223x1650px

>>50779927
>>Are you seriously saying that rope is more common for a Chinese peasant than lengths of wood and/or sharp farming implements? And that jury rigging a flail is more practical than just picking up and swinging around something blunt or sharp as it is?

You'reacting like those martial artists didn't involve training in weapons and techniques derived from improvised shovels/clubs/staffs/sickles/granary flails/pitch fork/hoes and other similar tools either.

Training in the use of weapons devised from improvised rope/chains/cloth is a natural extension of "Learn to fight with whatever's handy".

Up to and including bare hands/feet/grappling when absolutely nothing else is immediately within reach.

Pic unrelated.

>>50780212
The first post that started this chain was "Are these real?" Not "Were these real?" Are is present tense, which implies modern martial arts, which is the context I was using. Rope is more common than a tool from ancient china. "Is". Not "was".

>>50778942
>I own a few because they are really good for precise blows

>>50778916
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flail_(weapon)
> Its chief liability was a lack of precision

>>50779277
REAR IRON SIGHTS ON THE FUCKING MAGAZINE

I saw a video by a gunstore owner that put a reflex sight on the front though, that seemed to fix it. Sadly not a popular thing in the '80s when these guns were sold.

>>50779521
Meteor hammers fall into the category of concealed weapons in chinese martial theory and would have been used mostly after martial arts really came into its own as a holdout weapon. This weapon and a lot of the other ones that seem particularly impractical are meant for different situations than you imagine.

The spear and the saber are for the battlefield, hook swords and wolf tooth clubs and funny looking shit are for martial arts masters to duel each other with, and a lot of the 'soft' weapons are holdouts.

>>50778897
Considering how many buckets of them aren't found on battlefields it's safe to say that if they saw use it wasn't in organized warfare. Again supported by the idea of swinging one of those anywhere near a formation and not cracking your friend in the back of the head.

I also can't imagine them not bouncing off of shields and armor. Like boom there went half the force you put into the blow, just right over in fuck knows what direction.

>>50779996
>>50780054

I always imagined that they were for attacking a shielded opponent, You strike, he puts with shield up, the flail whips around and hits him in the head anyway

File: nobleman swerve.jpg (74KB, 643x600px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 643x600px

>>50778897
Matt Easton has an episode on this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGf7n7iUF_k

The gist is: "Yes, existed, would be a usable weapon."
This anon >>50779277
has the right of it.
There have always been strange weapons that have only some applications, but are very cool looking and popular for fantasy.
Consider the Desert Eagle, a gun that's widely regarded as too large to be practical for its purpose. If somebody centuries for now looked through military manuals, they'd probably find almost no refertences to Desert Eagles, but if they watched films they'd see tons. They might be driven to conclude that the Desert Eagle was a weapon purely of fantasy, but the reality is that they exist and are simply not widely used for a variety of reasons.

>>50780872
shields aren't generally held that close to the body.

File: 00f_1452.jpg (142KB, 700x976px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 700x976px

Gon beat the shit out of that wheat yo

File: must be more flail.jpg (104KB, 516x573px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 516x573px

>>50781504

>>50779431
as someone who uses something similar for fire twirling, I can tell you the moment these things hit something they lose all usable momentum and just bounce off uncontrollably. If they're as heavy as they look, I wouldn't be surprised if someone using them managed to do some decent damage to themselves.

>>50781935
>lose all usable momentum
It's not lost, it's transfered into what they hit with destructive force. That's the intended use of that momentum.

>>50779810
Presumably to not die when fighting knights. Of course no one in the real world "Specializes" in the way that you are thinking. If anything this would have been a weapon that someone had just in case they happening to come into contact with a knight.

>>50781935
I think it's supposed to be used more like a wrecking ball - it slams into the target.

>>50778942
>flails
>for the undead
Just get a baseball bat and a 12-gauge for criminals like the rest of us, you huge dork.

Yeah the flail existed but its pretty much a one on one weapon for taking out guys with good armor getting around shields having solid reach and being surprisingly good defensively since the spinning covers you pretty well. You can end up entangling a weapon or even disarming them with a little luck. The real problem is you need to be in constant motion with it and playing N64 Mario party with the thing is fuggin exhausting

>>50779833
Sailor here, Monkey's Fists (Weighted ball at the end of a rope) are handy weapons.

>>50783203
how are you going to entangle a weapon with something that grants you 0 leverage compared to the opponent's sharp pointy lever all up in your grill?

Or really any of that?

File: 1473846641786.jpg (52KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 800x600px

>>50783203
>entangling a weapon

While in theory it sounds like a good idea, unless you can unentangle your flail fairly quick, you're suddenly without a weapon too - and unless you have a dagger or another weapon handy, that won't be easy to take advantage of, and probably would just throw you off balance if you aren't expecting your weapon to get tangled up.

>>50780180
>Look at this bola

>NOW LOOK AT THIS NET

>>50781935
Fellow staff- and poi-bro here, this anon is right. Although bear in mind that poi are chain from hand to ball, whereas a flail is stick then chain then ball. Mitigates the chance of hitting yourself somewhat, but yeah even so it's going to be a really unreliable weapon.

>>50780168
Which is why you only "torc up" the disc when coming into reach of your foe.

A direct hit will stop the rotation of the head, but a glancing blow will likely bounce away and continue rotating off-kilter.

It's certainly not as effort efficient as a spear, but the rotation of a flail head can be kept up with fairly minimal movement of the arm and wrist.

The advantage of this tradeoff is that a flail blow is remarkably powerful when it lands directly.

It's also straight up intimidating to deal with, and has a long range when "flicked" at your enemy.

Still, I'm in agreement with the general sentiment that it is not the most efficient warrior's weapon.

Thinking about it though, a flail would be potentially devastating used from horseback.

As long as you don't accidentally brain your horse. . . . .

>>50784132
Oh hey! I made one of those exact things one time after a random heroine addict wandered into my home at 1am and shot up in our bathroom before I realized it wasn't my roomate coming home.

Scared the shit out of me, started properly checking the locks afterward and created one of these badboys.

>>50784132
I want to roll up a character who uses flail + bollock dagger now.

>>50779892
>That's a medieval scharfescheisse
>scharfescheisse
>scharfe
>scheisse

>>50785906
look, just call a doctor

>>50779686
Are you retarded?

File: 1482173254427.png (104KB, 866x743px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 866x743px

>>50786094
Sincerely, yes.

You've hurt my feelings.

I'm crying now.

>>50786181
Good.

File: WorfFacePalm.gif (897KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

897KB, 300x225px

>>50778942
>I have them because I read that they would be really good against zombies so I have them to use in case of a real-life zombie apocalypse.

>>50778942
>I have them because I read that they would be really good against zombies
seriously?

>>50786361
>>50788637
Let's be honest; it's code for "Islamic Insurgency"

>>50788704
Muslims are only weak against silver though due to being foreign devils.

>>50785843
>Thinking about it though, a flail would be potentially devastating used from horseback.
>As long as you don't accidentally brain your horse. . . . .

Though then you'd be best off with sticking a cavalry sabre onto a halberd connected with a chain. Just go maximum swing on that mother fucker.

>>50789017
how would that even work

File: Cod.icon._393_I_212v.jpg (845KB, 983x1400px) Image search: [Google]

845KB, 983x1400px

>>50778897
Sure, I just don't think they were very common.

>>50788985
>yfw Americans are weak to silver because they're the Great Satan

>>50791151
It balances out because they have a natural resistance to being disarmed.

>>50781935
They are supposed to smash in a right line, not to hit in a twirling motion.

>>50779953
A man who had a feudal obligation to render service as part of a levy would be required to have a weapon in order to fulfill that obligation. If he was pressed into service as part of his liege-lord's obligation, then the said lord would be required to outfit him. The only times people went to war using farming equipment was during peasant rebellions. The reason we have so many weapons modelled after agricultural equipment is familiarity. If you are a woodsman who is used to handling an axe, then you are likely be more comfortable with a war axe than with a sword, even though both weapons are purpose built tools of war.

>>50792702
A liege-lord would only outfit his levy as much as he could afford or as much as he thought they were worth - a spear might be very common to the point of almost being guaranteed, but there still might not be enough for anyone and some will have to make do with farm tools, and arrmor and shields were not at all common. In a worst case scenario, you round up as many peasants as you can, whether or not you can outfit them, to give you more numbers in a desperate situation.

>>50794115
As with all things this tends to depend on the place and time period. For example the English Assize of Arms of 1181 established a requirement that every freeman was to have sufficient weapons to go to war. Every knight and wealthy freeholder had to have a mail shirt, helmet, shield, and a lance. Less wealthy freeholders had to have a hauberk, iron cap, and lance. Finally burgesses and all other freemen were required to have a gambeson, iron cap, and lance. (Note that in this time period there's no distinction between lances and spears.) The English kings never really liked to use peasant levies, and the assize formalized that it would be free men who went to war, not the unfree peasantry.

Generally speaking peasant levies were a last resort. Most of the feudal obligations from peasantry were actually fulfilled as labour, whether by supporting armies or by on other projects of the local crown. Usually the people you intended to levy for war would be actually armed accordingly, or be found guilty of shirking their duties. So the most likely place to find peasants wielding farm tools is a peasant rebellion, in which case they really did not have anything else on hand.

And then there was the guy who was required by the terms of his lease to "go to war with bow and arrow", so he took his bow, fired his arrow at the enemy, then went home.

>>50791151
Actually, it's better to use gold on us since we're capitalists.

File: cross-of-gold.jpg (227KB, 660x853px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 660x853px

>>50796226

File: ayyy.jpg (34KB, 587x347px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 587x347px

>>50778942
>I have them because I read that they would be really good against zombies so I have them to use in case of a real-life zombie apocalypse.

File: sullen.gif (2MB, 294x232px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 294x232px

>>50778942
Anon, there is a science behind muscle and movement. You see, muscle needs oxygen to function, and the dead dont breathe, there is no blood flowing to the muscles. Even if by some horrible scientific experiment they learned how to re animate a corpse, it would be incapable of movement. Now they COULD stick brains into cyber bodies and make cyber zombies, but at that point why not use living brains like robocop, with no degredation.

TLDR see attached gif.

File: 1481788052690.gif (4MB, 204x204px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 204x204px

Not really

>>50786361
>>50797220
What is so funny?

>>50797318
But it could still happen, through methods man is not yet aware of.

>>50797318
Less classic zombie, more mental/infected zombie.

Duh

File: 1463732245794.jpg (56KB, 527x799px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 527x799px

>>50797318
One definition of zombie is 'a person who is or appears lifeless, apathetic, or completely unresponsive to their surroundings.' It's an older term, before the term zombie started getting used for the living dead.

But basically, everyone you know who's dead inside, or shows a cold exterior to the world? They're zombies. And who knows? Maybe someday they'll be a part of a mindless horde ready to tear civilization down.

>>50798178
Top row: fine, fine, fine, club your own hand like a retard, triple smash your own hand, alright.
Bottom row: potentially crack your own hand, absolutely smash your own own hands, probably smash your own hands, and alright.

>>50780432
>holdout weapon
Is this a specific term that is used somewhere? Google is giving me a bunch of Fallout related hits, and as near as I can infer it means 'things used when they otherwise are not allowed'.

File: DSC00944.jpg (215KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 800x600px

>>50798574
I think the term originated with small pistols, notable Derringers (or at least they're the prime example) for concealable armaments to be used when nothing else is available due to the circumstances typically (but not always) forbidding the open carrying of weapons.

A meteor hammer is fairly concealable as it can be wrapped around something under clothing since it's mostly just a chain.

>>50798571
To be fair, I think 7 is a two-handed flail. And some of those might be symbolic, or victorian recrations.

>>50798725
One problem I have with that is that usually holdout weapons are also something you can bring out fairly quickly - you might have stuffed it in a boot or sleeve or pocket, but it's not something meant to be used with preparation.

A meteor hammer might be easy to store, but unwrapping it would take time and possibly even require partially stripping depending on how you stored it. I'd rather a knife or a knuckleduster ('My Friend' or brass knuckle, fine with me).

>>50799848
>but unwrapping it would take time
Grab an end and pull. If you're wearing loose clothing it'll unwrap immediately.
We're discussing synchronous usage. You would be wearing loose clothing.

>>50778897
Flails were basically made to turn a squishy target in your general vicinity into paste

>>50778897
Look up "Nunchaku".

>>50799932
Come on, what about the weights? Surely it would be uncomfortable to just tug and let them bang against your body a bit. And I'm not sure how long they are, but you wouldn't want the other end to just dangle while you're getting it fully out.

>>50800173
>And I'm not sure how long they are, but you wouldn't want the other end to just dangle while you're getting it fully out.
You could start spinning one end as you unwrap it. Even throw it halfway through to finish unwrapping it.
>Surely it would be uncomfortable to just tug and let them bang against your body a bit.
Wear it below your robes, but above padded clothing. Or wrap the heads in pads, then maybe take them off if you get the chance.
They're heavy, but they won't hurt you if they aren't moving quickly.

File: Asura% MAD.jpg (154KB, 500x803px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 500x803px

>>50797324
>that gif
Holy fuck

>>50779866

Talking about medieval times

>Easier to acquire than a length of rope? I dunno about you, but rope is one of the most common things in my life.
>dunno about you, but rope is one of the most common things in my life...

>a horse is easier to acquire than a car? I dunno about you, but cars are one of the most common things in my life, never see horses around anymore!

First of all, you are an idiot

You seriously have no idea how time consuming it was to make rope do you? newsflash buddy, for some weird reason it took a lot more effort to make things in the 1400's than they do 600+ years later

Especially finding 2 sticks vs making a large lenght of rope

>>50801904
Nice way of completely ignoring an entire post chain talking about context. Sure showed him.

>>50779802
When I think "flail", "Kusarigama" is not something that comes to mind.

>>50797318
An hypotetical real-life 'zombie apocalypse' scenario could involve people driven into madness, aggressiveness and cannibalism by an infective neurodegenerative disease. It wouldn't be about 'living dead' but more like 'living brain-dead'.
The tricky part would be the pack mentality that prevents 'zombies' from attacking each other.

>>50798178
The term comes from voodoo folklore and specifically designated reanimated dead. It is supposed 'actual' zombies might have been made, with drugs that would make a person look dead for long enough to be buried and then let them reawaken in a mindless stupor where they could be ordered around like golems.

>>50802300
They have a certain stank identified by other hosts of the illness. Wouldn't be ideal, but people often underestimate just how well humans can smell.


Also my favorite zombie story is the one where a man brought his zombie hoard to a sugar plantation to collect all them fat referral bonuses.

File: 1469253799490.jpg (254KB, 514x635px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 514x635px

>>50778942
>I have them because I read that they would be really good against zombies so I have them to use in case of a real-life zombie apocalypse.

>>50802388
I know it has a dick, but all google knows is that the exact image you posted has shown up on /d/ literally once (and is called "Anime").

A little help here?

File: threshing.jpg (44KB, 347x349px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 347x349px

>>50779810
A thresher is basically a simple flail.

>>50780236
>>50801985

Holy fucking god dude, just please stop trying to safe face, it's not working

>>50797608
You want a warpick so you can pierce the unarmoured head and skull and destroy the brain. Not a flail

>>50802637
Flails derived directly from threshers were actually reported as being used by the peasant members of the Hussite uprising in 15th century Bohemia, alongside of scythes and even pickaxes. While the role of the peasants during the Hussite uprisings have been historically often exaggerated due to political and ideological reasons, their presence on the battle-field has been confirmed and there is little reason to entirely doubt the historical sources on this.
So yeah, flails have been used as real weapons. I had one as kid too, my grandfather actually made it from a real fucking historical thresher he found on his farm. I had a sweet childhood.

>>50785867

>heroin addict invades home

>this guy takes a look at a master lock, and instead of putting it on a door, makes a weapon out of it.

I'm not mad, I'm impressed.

>>50805788
Locks don't usually maim intruders. Weapons do. I can see the logic.

>>50778897
i can assure you they were real. see attacking a fuckhead in iron head to toe and holding a shield in your face is not easy. but with flails it can be done.

File: image.jpg (77KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 500x500px

>>50797324
>That gif
Not even mad, just sad.

>>50791151
>Dude it turned out my neighbour is a vampire
>How do you know?
>I put an aspen stake through his heart and he died

>>50778897
THERE IS NO HISTORICAL EVIDENCE THAT THE MULTI-HEADED FLAIL WAS EVER USED OR MADE IN MEDIEVAL TIMES. Sure there were flails though. That is well documented.

>>50802982
But a flail has spikes and can also wrap around the zombie's neck to rip its head off.

>>50779791
Thats why you spin it above your head idiot.