Knights VS Magic VS Guns! **Response to Shadiversity**
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 окт 2021
- Install Raid for Free ✅ IOS/ANDROID/PC: clcr.me/scholagladiatoria_Rai... and get a special starter pack 💥 Available only for the next 30 days
Shadiversity recently did a video looking at how to keep knights relevant in fantasy settings with magic. In that video a parallel was drawn with gunpowder, so I thought I'd explore that theme further.
Shadiversity's video can be found here: • Making knights relevan...
Patreon & Extra Videos: / scholagladiatoria
Support & extra content on Subscribestar: www.subscribestar.com/matt-ea...
Facebook & Twitter updates, info and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfightinglondon.com
Matt Easton's website and services:
www.matt-easton.co.uk/
Easton Antique Arms:
www.antique-swords.co.uk/
Install Raid for Free ✅ IOS/ANDROID/PC:
Technically, armour is making a comeback. It's not the same armour that Matt is referring to - it's not hardened steel as of old, but composite/ceramic plates in a carrier, but soldiers (as well as police forces) are using body armour once again to protect them against firearms and other sharp melee weapons like knives. So really, armour has only "gone away" for a few decades.
Just to clear some things, Shad said the better guns got the less swords were used. Not that’s swords disappeared when guns were invented
This video is cool but it spends too much time addressing a misquote [with the guns replacing swords immediately conceptualization]. I was just confused when you said that, because I saw Shad's vid, and immediately came to this one because I saw you also had a contribution response, and you completely misquoted Shad. Then you proceed to explain in extreme detail something that [I believe] was never under question. So, I spent most of time just seeing you not addressing the real issue… Which is not JUST guns but modern guns versus swords [modern as in present-times]. So every time you mentioned about the usage of guns before along with the sword and whatnot, you were ignoring the fact that guns were in fact taking over the sword gradually to the point it's not feasible today. Which is what Shad said, sooo... it wastes a lot of time in a wrong idea caused by yourself. :/
Guns didn't make swords obsolete, machine guns did.
To be clear, Shad said that as firearms improved, swords were used less and less.
you should try to be accurate in videos like this
I like to think that mages on a battlefield would be like fighter planes. Sure, they could do a lot of damage against ground troops, but they are there mainly to counter the enemy fighter planes/mages.
A series that actually does all that pretty well is Slayers. The main character is a powerful mage... and she spends most of the series' combat fighting off close-combat ambushes with her one-handed sword while trying to create an opening so she can take the time to chant a spell. Her partner can't fight with magic, but he's good at noticing and fighting off these ambushes, and has a magic sword and magic armor, so he can pull his own weight pretty well. And they're always looking for magic swords, armor, and the like, as it gives them huge passive advantages without needing the time for spells, and helps them avoid being killed off by an ambush out of nowhere.
Another thing here, if not everyone is a proficient sorcerer, and it's not straightforward to just train peasant levies into proficient sorcerers in a few weeks, either because magic is genetically limited, a rare gift from a deity, a result of specific life experience, or simply requires a lot of practice to become proficient with, then we will likely have a battlefield with only small numbers of sorcerers who are certainly more powerful than others but their numbers will be low. Maybe countries with an efficient meritocratic bureaucracy and high literacy rates that can sort through every serf or peasant to scout for potential magic users to train would end up with mostly magical armies while countries without such things would rely mostly on a small core of magic users and vast formations of infantry and cavalry?
Being a Turk, the frankly offensive size of the Ottoman siege cannons makes me proud
"A swordsman battled a sorcerer once upon a time.
Great video mate! In my defence though, you've taken me out of, context. I didn’t say swords disappeared when guns were invented. . .
I get a giggle at the people getting mad at the other creator, while the two of these guys would/do just nerd out happy as fuck together. I love seeing creators having this much fun doing something they love! you guys both rock.
the real issue was not "firearms" ... the real issue was ammunition.
The real problems are not the damage dealing spells. A good enchanter made a whole battle obsolet ("Aah, my good friend, let us made a treaty of peace!"), a illusionist also ("they have far more troops then we expected"), a conjurer summons creatures from other planes, that singlehandly made more damage than a whole platoon, a scryer made the formations of the enemys and the allys visible on the desk of the commander, in combination with communication magic the army reacts more agile and so on. The real battle mage is a supporter! Magic is versatile, so don't use the stupid damage spells and be creative.
Let's also not forget that IF you have wizards using magic in armies..........both sides will most likely have them(since magic would be pretty powerful). That means.......a balancing of power. They'll be so busy counter acting each other, the regular warriors will be free to do what they do, more or less. If a Wizard was to ignore his enemy counterparts, he/she himself would quickly fall victim to the very magic they're using from the enemy. It just ends up being the same strategical situation with different weapons. Just like early firearms and hand held weapons. Now..........if magic became amazingly cheap and easy to use, like firearms, so that you DO have an army of wizards literally, then the knight would be pointless.
Fun fact: the 1st-level wizard spell
Haven't seen the Shad one so I have no context. I'm here to see how nerdy Matt really is. Evil Wizard: "There is no CONTEXT to hide behind when dealing with magic, swordsman!"
One thing I love about "swordtube" is the sense of community these response videos engender. I don't know another community where top names will throw out responses and it will be taking in the friendly continuing the conversation way that it is here. We are all just some nerds that love talking about this mess, NO Drama.