Samurai versus Knight

[Zeebu]

vote 4 tom cruise

[RednaZ]

Since the best Knight is Ash from Army of Darkness, I agree, there is no contest.

As he'd say:
Yo, she-bitch! Let's go!

At least Sanada was real

P.s. they called him crimson demon of war, how wicked is that!

[Sarien]

The Peasant with the gun watching this idiocy rage on would win.

[Epinephrine]

Depends who gets the first blow.

I think the katana's steel would probably be strong enough to pierce armour if done directly in a very good thurst. In this way, the knight would die if the samurai managed to score a good first blow.

If the knight got the first hit, he'd easily go right through the samurai with his 30-40 pound broadsword and that would be that.

If they managed to block eachother and both were good at blocking, the knight would have the advantage as the broadsword would simply have much more momentum and the samurai would have trouble parrying it, and also stopping it from even breaking his katana. Of course if the knight didn't have a steel sword but only iron, then the Samurai wins easily.

[Dack Falu]

The Peasant with the gun watching this idiocy rage on would win.

BUT ITS MAEDIVEL TIEMS, THEY DONT HAEV AN GUNS

[paradise!]

No it isn't, anything can happen in a speed vs. strenght fight.

A knight would easily own a samurai, because the knight has better weaponry than the samurai.

Imagine a fight between the two of them. My favourite kind of knight with a light platemail and a longsword and a small convex-shaped shield (for mobility, instead of a gigant tower/kite shield) vs. a medium armored samurai with a sharp katana and fast swordsmanship.

The fight will end up with the samurai going for a gigant power swing, and the knight will block it with his shield. If the convex shield is made of wood, the katana will get stuck in it, letting the knight will get a clean hit on the samurai. If it's made of metal the katana hit will get deflected and the attack will bounce off, giving the knight some miliseconds to do an attack of opportunity/counter attack.

RATTY > Knight > Samurai

fag

[Nickname]

The samurai is either carrying two swords or one longer and one shorter (note, when i say swords, i mean katanas). Those of you thinking he's carrying one short sword are very foolish. I collect weaponry, I have long katanas, i have short ones, etc. The knight is using a shield and sword combo (i'm assuming) which means on the defence he's better, which is good, since he's being attacked at least twice as much as he's attacking. A samurai is far more mobile, even in full armour, than a fully armoured knight, who is both slow, and cumbersome, as well as quickly tired through the wait of it all. I really have to beleive the fight would end with the knight being out manuevered and possibly losing his shield (due to damage, due to being town from his armour, etc) making it 1 slow sword vs 2 fast katanas. The Samurai would win, MOST OF THE TIME. Any real blow the Knight lands however, would probably be fatal, or would lead to a fatal blow within seconds. It's offense vs Defence, and eys the defence can win, he can defend himself to an opening, and then win.

I still say Samurai wins 75% of the time-ish

[RednaZ]

If he's any decent samurai he will be carrying the long and short one, and he will not fight with the short one

[DJSlayer]

And the battle rages:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sZOoBDaPNiY

You idiots you can't argue with video footage! The knight wins!

[Dabram]

what the fuck is this thread.

[Spider]

Can't the Samurai throw fireballs? Why the fuck are you so obsessed with his pansy sword. He'd just fireball that Knight.**

Also you're all talking about the sterotypical descriptions of Samurais and Knights that we've all heard. I'm just throwing this out there did anyone even wikipedia this for a sec to find out if these impressions are correct? I myself didn't and therefor have no clue but I'd give at least 1/2 odds that the sterotypical impression of at least one of these two things is off by at least a little bit. Or maybe you're 100% right that Samurais are "fast and sneeky!" and Knights "slow yet obscenely strong!". *shrug*

One guy was saying Samurais fight in armys while most of you seem to think they run around alone looking for some hapless fool hiding in a shadow so they can chop his head off and be home in time to get frisky with his wife.

**EDIT: I like how TK replied saying the Samurai used guns at one point. Basically, in a way, they did have fireballs. That's funny.

[Troll King]

Everyone's also making the mistake of assuming they'd only use a broadsword versus a katana, when the truth is they have other options available to them. The knight for example could be using a mace, while a samurai could be using... um, let me go wikipedia up a list of samurai weapons and... ah, there it is. A teppo, or as it's known in the west, an arquebus, an early predecessor to the rifle.

The guy with the gun wins.

[Noah]

Sir Ian McKellen has also been been given the knight title.

He can still learn how to use a tank, and wtfpwn the Samurai in it.

So yeah, at a certain timeframe, either the Knight or the Samurai would be there with a gun, we have to look past that and really onto the core issue, the melee fighting.

[Troll King]

But that's something you can't ignore. They existed in different timeframes. In the shogun era, guns were in use. Oda Nobunaga (yes, the guy from various video games) was noted for his tactical use of firearms in warfare and was instrumental to him conquering a large chunk of Japan. For knights however, they heralded their slide into obsolescence.

[Nickname]

I think for the sake of this it's no range weapons. The knight could have a crossbow.