"Best" & "Worst" Melee Weapons? - How to Rate Objectively
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 янв 2022
- Anyone who is interested in historical arms and armor and/or fantasy RPG equipment has their opinions on which sword or other weapon is better than others, always with a certain level of bias of course. Is there a way in which we can look at different designs with more objectivity? It's never going to be perfect, but here are my thoughts on what to keep in mind, and some suggestions for criteria to score.
If you're heavily invested in the katana vs. longsword fanboy war by the way you may be disappointed to find how I personally compare them. :)
I also have some ratings for the Klingon bat'leth from Star Trek, which @shadiversity doesn't seem to be terribly fond of. ;)
More thoughts on it:
• The Klingon Bat'leth: ...
** Music **
Intro song:
"Illuminate" by Vindsvept
vindsvept.bandcamp.com/track/...
Used with artist's permission
Outro:
"Highland Storm" by The Slanted Room Records
theslantedroom.github.io/stev...
Used with artist's permission
** Support the channel **
Help fund future videos, get bonus content and access to an exclusive Discord server
/ skallagrim
www.subscribestar.com/skallagrim
/ @skallagrim
Other ways to support the channel by shopping through affiliate links:
Kult of Athena, my favorite online store for reproductions of historical arms and armor, fantasy swords, etc:
www.kultofathena.com/?koa=259
Where to get HEMA gear and practice swords:
www.woodenswords.com/?Click=1799
Want to treat your face fluff? I highly recommend the balms and oils from Beard Sorcery:
beardsorcery.com/?ref=0UEFtHW...
** Social media & merch **
How to contact me (can't always reply, as I get too many messages):
/ skallagrim
See a list of my video uploads:
/ _skallagrim_
/ skallagrimyt
Channel-related shirts and other merch:
skallagrim.spreadshirt.com/
teespring.com/stores/skallagrim
#swords #weapons #history 
Развлечения
Do more. Go nuts. Axes, maces, flails, polearms, messers, etc. I would watch every single one.
Go really nuts and do exotic weapons: chakrams, macuahuitls, katars, hookswords ect.
I would too. That would be quite enjoyable
And a special episode for various polearm heads. Could be fun idk
Halberd halberd halberd halberd halberd halberd halberd halberd halberd halberd halberd halberd halberd
Oh heck even do everything on it's own category and compare the winners after
I've been playing Hades and just heard Achilles say that the hand is the greatest weapon of them all since it is the only one which can wield all others. I like that.
That is an amazing line.
Well, that does sound wise and all, but then there's this classic youtube clip ruclips.net/video/9FkxMM9mc1k/видео.html
Some may argue that the hand is a fine weapon in its own right too, and one you'll always have available to you. Well, unless you get dismembered.
@@raziyatheseeker Can still beat a bastard with a stump!
Reminds me of Ivan Illich's Tools for Conviviality. The ancients didn't consider the hand of the wielder and the tool as separate things. Sounds weird at first but it's a fascinating thing once you get into it.
Total points shown for each weapon,
in order from worst to best:
6. Dagger 27
5. Bat'Leth 29
4. Katana 29-30
3. Tachi 30.5
2. Longsword 31
1. Spear 32
We have found the best weapon;
Pokey Stick!
ye
Great!
Thanks for saving my time, mate.
@@FirstLast-wk3kc :D
Unless you can afford a longsword/tachi
No surprise there.
Skallagrim: "Torches and pitchforks!"
Me: (expecting to see the stats for torches and pitchforks)
We all gotta min max before the lynching!
The upside and downside of the torches and pitchforks combo is that it's wholly reliant on the number of people in its mob.
@@Profile__1 and the target. if you are facing people on a rained on hill then torches are far less usefull as the pitchforks
also the pitchforks are more usefull if they still have pitch on them (potentially not even need ing torches at that point)
@@bradpotts1747 No, pitchforks are useful by themselves - you probably would be surprised how long did bidented and tridented pitchforks exist in armories as military forks.
@@nikmenn2751 pitch forks are (wouldnt you know it) used to move pitch. pitch was commonly used to make torches. it is by definition not a military fork irregardless of its effectiveness or how commonly it was used as one.
that said, im not sure how much harder i could have been winking with that comment
When it comes to daggers and armor, it always reminds me of something Ambrose Bierce wrote.
“MISERICORDE, n. A dagger which in mediaeval warfare was used by the foot soldier to remind an unhorsed knight that he was mortal.”
The double meaning of the last part is superb.
When it comes to daggers and armor it reminds me of battle brothers and surrounding a knight with shivs to peel him out of it so you can sell his mint condition armor.
@@the_soggster3464 For every loss there is a gain. And if it is in coins, the better.
love the implication that a horsed knight is
Is the double meaning that low-caste men can upset the nobility?
@@Jathrael And not just a tummy ache.
I would be really interested to see this rating system used with the added criteria of how greatly skill affects its efficiency or deadliness. For example: A club vs a sword. Not necessarily how deadly something is without training, but more how large of a skill gap there is between novice and master.
That's interesting, it's a relevant criterion after all. If a weapon takes too long to be used effectively, there's no point on spending more money if you just care to equip a militia fast, for example.
Someone gave me this example some days ago, it's pretty simple but regardless (it did not come from me): equipping a militia with halberds VS equipping them with pikes. Halberds are more expensive and to really take advantage from them you need more training than with spikes, and it's just a militia.
@@didack1419 Historically pikes blocks were fairly high trained because to use such long pikes in very tight formations and still be able to manuvre on the battlefield you needed quite a lot of skill.
@@fabiovarra3698 that's for regular army. Militia just need to thrust enemies and then go back to work, cause somebody need to feed country and army xd
@@yarikyaryi Then we are talking of something like the anglosaxon fyrd, or other peasant militia, who historically were equiped by themselfs. Both pikes and halberds were for most part used by professional soldiers or at least fairly trained levies.
@@didack1419 pike formations were well drilled professional soldiers. They had to be to face down cavalry and other pike formations without getting scared and breaking
Although that’s obvs just unit and formation training not hand to hand
I’m in a LARP (weekend-long camping trip with 70 other people, fantasy outfits and foam weapons) and I feel that bit about spears in everyday life. Everyone loves when the spear-person shows up to defend the town, but only 3 people carry them around all day because they weigh a ton and people keep tripping over them in the tavern.
I wish i could do this so much...
yeah and that's why context matters, if I was walking around town and I wanted a self-defense weapon as a precaution, I would never consider a spear. It's annoying to carry and it gets in the way too much and if I was to get into a fight in a confined space like a tavern, well the spear isn't going to be useful there.
But if I knew I was certain to see open combat that day, a spear would be my priority
@@Trepur349 I usually practice staff fighting because the chances of finding a solid broom handle or a half decent branch are not bad, and can always be used as a walking stick.
Weekend-long? More like I'm longing for that weekend amirite
6:40 is the best analysis I've heard. Many glance over or ignore that a weapon is part of a larger kit. A lot of medieval weapons had poor defense because they were intended to be used in conjunction with a shield. The same is true about using a weapon while wearing heavy armor or with a gauntlet.
Yeah, and the Skalligrim went ahead and rated all the weapons independently anyway -.- I wish he said what the weapon was being used WITH in the other hand when he made this rating system. A spear + shield is a fundamentally different fighting style with different pros and cons than if the same spear is being used 2-handed.
@@TheRABIDdude Katana had way too much defense.
@@TheRABIDdudedid you see the Bat’leth portion 😂
@@eeurr1306same to you, you see the Bat’leth section 😂
4:45 That’s actually a brilliant weapon, just allow the enemy to disarm you that way they hurt themself with it
it would make for some interesting duels where the combatants are just as afraid of themselves as their opponent
@@elio7610 Lol
I don't think anyone is stupid enough to use that monstrosity
@@goealshafay425 You’d be surprised
@@goealshafay425 I'd say it would be feasible with a bit of a redesign. Personally I'd make the sword more to the scale of a long sword or broad sword and extend the chain quite a bit so it's more like what you'd find attached to kamas.
Obviously the best weapon is the one that can defeat the armor that can defend against the most weapons...a giant can opener
A bottle off rust monster venom.
Like playing Dark Souls with guys throwing the durability bombs.
@@psycomutt Scraping Spear >>>>>
That needs to be an anime. I personally envisioned a comedy where armor (or maybe giant robots) are covered in exposed screws and bolts, where the main character uses super speed combined with a screwdriver to remove the fastenings in the blink of an eye.
I recommend changing “damage” to “force” ie, how much force is required to produce a lethal strike. Because truthfully all weapons that have a sharp edge have a very, very similar amount of damage potential, same goes for pointy and blunt. The only real difference is in quality and upkeep. A poorly maintained longsword with a dull edge will do less damage than a sharp steak knife. So, using the force required to kill or maim something as the metric and assuming all weapons can reach that target given it is of good quality and well kept, to me makes more sense.
The problem I see with damage is that we often conflate two different things: Systemic collapse vs physical damage. On the latter, Weapons have trumendous variance. A huge Greatsword might be able to cleave a person in half (might be hyperbole, also, horizontally vs vertically), while an arming sword or a dagger, not so much.
An important note is, however, various targets, like naked humans, don't have too much that can soak that damage. Cutting off an arm only requires so much "damage" so different weapons could do that. And due to how our body works as a system, many attacks that wouldn't deal much damage can still take us out. Like cutting open a big arteria, of severing tendons.
I would add a 'stopping power' characteristic. Obviously the dagger damage is deadly when you're a hit-and-run assassin, but a person with a dagger wound is often able to fight back and die later, which is much more unlikely if you for example cut ones legs off by a longsword. Of course there are a lot of different situations but we are talking aboug averages here (I guess)
@@AntonNidhoggr I feel like bludgeoning weapons might have a headstart on stopping power as their the ones transferring most of their energy into a target. and while thrusts end up being deadly fairly often, they seem to take the longest to actually make someone stop and consider they're dead.
Though that would be a stron simplification and does not put into account how actual technique/area hit&damaged plays into there.
And changing "adaptability" to "versatility"
That's the implication. They are one and the same. If you're going to write a universal scientific (obviously non biased) paper on it, sure, but it's perfectly explained in the video, and the rest is semantics. I don't say that clear terms aren't king, but context is all that matters.
I kind of liked how "Deadliest Warrior" categorized. Close range, short range, medium range, etc.
So much in WW1 was about long range, but then the trench raiders were custom making surprisingly short weapons.
Surprisingly, but the most common, though absolutely forgotten was so-called "french nail".
Really like this presentation and agree with pretty much all of the ratings. Maybe this could be a mini-series ranking specific weapons of each type in every episode.
I agree
yes, I'd definitely watch a series on these kinds of stats.
Better to rank swordsmanship, at which nearly all historical reconstructionists will fail because they don't train sufficiently under the instruction of masters.
(The only masters in historical European I know of, especially after searching for on on youtube, are the guys who get paid a lot of money to choreography for the movies, and the best FIE teachers who train the Olympic Fencers.)
HEMA = Historic Exaggeration of Martial Ability
Pommel
Damage: 7 (Not only does it end the opponent, but it ends them rightly, thus rubbing salt into the wound)
Anti-Armor: 7 (The Noble Pommel simply disregards armor, as armor is only used by cowards who cannot end their opponents rightly)
Durability: Infinite (The Pommel is eternal. No mundane thing like wear, tear, rust, or time can tarnish it)
Speed: 300,000 k/s (The pommel is light, but powerful, enabling it to go the speed of light)
Reach: 7 (Nobody can escape the reach of the pommel)
Defense: 6 (Okay, I know I'm being overly nit-picky with this one, but it doesn't have a cross-guard, so it can't universally defend against literally everything both real and imaginary)
Adaptability: 5 (Again, don't crucify me, but the pommel can't do literally everything. It still hasn't filed my taxes, and my dog still died)
Affordability: 1 (This is "debatably" its weakest point, as only the worthy can wield the true pommel)
When fused with the mighty stick, we get the hammer: forger of all lesser weapons, and civilization itself.
@@marctaco2624 Mother of God!
@@marctaco2624 Given the shape of a pommel it would be a mace, wouldn't it?
@@poilboiler depends on the pommel
The right measure is km, not k... That could be referring to kilotons, kilograms... Anything, actually.
If you want a really badass sharp bladed weapon and can't decide between a sword and a spear, consider the wickedly effective Zulu assegai.
Double-edged, long, wide, cutting sharp, pointy, agilely handled with both one and two hands, robust enough to parry, with a wide variety of effective ranges and even usable as a balanced piercing projectile, it does it all!
No, your assegai.
@@jkenzo87 Well, my personal bodyguard robot, then. 😆
The traditional Zulu assegai is still a model. I don't know exactly at which point the customisation of one assegai in particular make it non-Zulu.
Love that affordability is a criterion here! The best weapon is always the one that you can get to the most people in your army. Being able to arm and armour your army is a super necessary factor to see considered. Love the content thank you!
spear
Nuclear-capable eight engine strategic bomber:
Damage: easy 6. It's meant to level entire cities.
Anti-Armor: easy 6. One of the reasons these have an argument for use over missiles is that they can penetrate bunkers.
Durability: 3. On the one hand, at least it is reuseable, and with sufficient air superiority it is hard to attack and can take moderate amounts of punishment. On the other hand, there are all manner of things that will damage or destroy it and it has a khgjillion moving parts.
Speed: 4. Despite being able to move almost the speed of sound, it's not actually all that fast to deploy, especially compared to missiles or troops that are already nearby and don't need ginormous paved runways.
Reach: 5. These things compete with ICBMs.
Defense: 1. it's a sitting duck. The only real defensive option is to bomb troops coming to its position or to flee to another large airbase. It can't effectively defend itself in the air either. Nor can it really be a primary defensive weapon to protect a base.
Adaptability: 2. There are two settings, genocide and nuclear genocide. They are decidedly unsubtle weapons that don't really work very well outside of total war.
Affordability: 1. Not only them but everything related to them costs huge amounts of resources to build, own and use.
When you mentioned a poorly designed firearm with failure to feed and eject, you instantly reminded me of the Zip .22, in which failure to feed and eject is the main feature
That kind of goes to the opposite point. Sometimes we can disregard weapons because they suck, lol.
@@psycomutt In this case, the Zip .22 which is not even a terrible weapon, it's just garbage. Not rubbish, garbage
if zip 22 would be a sword it would be some stainless steel junk which its blade would fly off the first time you swing it
At that point, you’re better off throwing the Zip-22 to end them rightly.
@@TrueMentorGuidingMoonlight The Zip .22 has no grip, the bolt is plastic and cycles really fast, it has no feeding ramp or ejector, the charging handles are literally and physically in front of the muzzle, and to add the cherry on top, the owner's manual SPECIFICALLY STATES and quote, "you can attach it to your carbine and shoot it down the street" implying that the .22 LR, a very popular caliber for assassination, small game hunting and espionage, is non-lethal
PLEASE do more. I really liked this and hope that you can classify the weapons in melee and ranged
Yeah I need an hour version of you rambling about everything, different polearms, axes, maces, I could listen to this for days
I'd say adaptibility has to be higher on a dagger, its a weapon that has been used basically since forever and it is still used, like a fairburn-sikes dagger in modern military.
sure, you always need one when it comes down to an eventual grapple, but grapples can be avoided
in terms of actual combat roles, its not so great, both sword and dagger can be used behind a shield, but only a sword can be used on horseback or in formation
For ancient times, I think the best bet for average performance would be a mace. Easy to maintain, easy to use, works against armor, unlikely to hurt yourself, can block hits without worrying about dulling the weapon.
Regarding adaptability, it can also be thrown for more reach, although realistically with pretty terrible damage and ease of use (plus, you're disarming yourself in doing so, so not really an ideal move either way, I'm afraid, but still worth noting).
Well to be fair a dagger is the only melee weapon used in a modern military. So it doesn't have to compete with anything.
@@berserkerpride combat knives are still in use by modern militaries, yes. But those are almost never used as a weapon. I'd guess that "clubs" are more often used vs people (or rifle stocks as such).
Sticks-clubs-shields are still used by law enforcement agencies.
Actually I too try to unravel the mysteries of the universe. Finding out the best melee weapons is one of those mysteries lol
Depends on your enemies stats and what they wear.
@@vincentvalentine4401 depends on a vast number of things
Electrically powered circular saw with solar panels to allow recharging without power grid.
@@vksasdgaming9472 would think that be pretty heavy though.
@@jasonarthur5487 Yep, but it has almost all the benefits of chainsaw with less kickback.
When it comes to self-defense, my brother has a saying, which he heard from some instructor - "Your fist/hand gets you to your knife. Your knife gets you to your gun." Basically, you always want to keep your distance from the other guy whenever possible. Also, if the other fella really wants to fight unarmed, don't drop your weapon - they probably know what they are doing in that case, or are just that crazy.
Oh, you mean it's not like in the media? xD
@@Dack.howaboutyou Where folks drop their weapons and fight like gentlemen with fisticuffs? That went out with Queensberry.
Btw don't forget that the pointy stick also doubles as any other stick.
Like a walking stick, which makes it perfect for travel.
And you always have your weapon literally in hand too.
The effectiveness in confined spaces depends on many factors, try fighting a pointy stick in a narrow hallway, you might find it difficult to approach without getting skewered.
6:35 - In addition to its use with a large shield, the gladius is also supposed to exist as a part of a weapon system with the pila (throwing spear or heavy javelin). The pila provides the flexibility of being used as either a throwing weapon that may partially disable the enemy's shield, or be used as a 7 foot thrusting spear.
The pila would still be incredibly ineffective as a spear. The durability would be horrible, it was used in desperate situations against cavalry in close quarters but it was designed specifically as a Javelin.
There's quite a few weapons like that. Zulu iklwa is meant for use with a shield and a handful of assegai. So are a number of other African close combat weapons.
@@Romulus-mn9uq Caesar defeated Pompei and became the absolute ruler of Rome by using a single cohort using their pila as spears. Design it however you want, no one likes to get impaled
@@mortache what battle? No one wants their spear head to suddenly bend either. Pila were literally meant to break from hard contact, so the enemy couldn't throw them back at the legionaries once stuck in their Shields.
@@mortache and now put your beloved "pilamen" against guys with sarissas. Caesar fought against romans who shared the same equipment, putting this battle as an example doesn't make pila the best spear. It's a spear, yes, but against better spears it's not even closely as good. The main strength of Caesar's army was discipline and adaptability of his men, not pila tactics.
Tbh, a small series where you go through weapons of all types (historical or modern) using this judging criteria would be pretty fun to watch.
Superb video. Love how you continuously mention that the context and circumstance is the main determinant of what's "best"
One brutally efficient and under-appreciated weapon is the Roman legionary sword or "Gladius" shorts word. I'm glad he mentioned it. In close combat it's ferocious and deadly. Hard to break, good armor piercing capabilities (for that period).
Rapiers came about after muzzle-loading firearms when plate armor would be as expensive as it is useless. By then, people weren't really wearing armor anymore because it just made you slow and a cannon or musketeer formation would blast you dead ... or some drunk guy in a tavern with a flintlock pistol 5ft away. So once armor was out, rapiers were in. A long, thin thrusting sword was perfect. It can reach far and pierce, and can even cut a bit if you sweep someone with it.
Weapons have to be analyzed like this, and this guy does a great job. Says the same thing about spears I've often said, that they make a thousand peasants into a deadly army. The Viking sword was made for a time when people fought in close formations with heavy shields, thick leather armor and mail. It was built like a heavy cleaving machete that wouldn't break when beating it against wooden shields and pieces of steel. A katana is a totally different design for a different sort of use and fighting. They each dominated the battles of their own time and place. Imagine having to use a katana in a Viking vs Saxon battle, or having to use Viking gear in feudal Japan ... you'd die very quickly ...
Context is key indeed. The best weapon would be a shape shifting mass changing artifact you can change into anything for every given context, and stuff like that only exists in the fantasy stories like the one I'm writing 😂. Jokes aside I do understand some weapons are more versatile than others that's all it comes down to but, you have to think about the context. Some versatile aspects of a given weapon may not be needed by a given culture or situation because their way of fighting or defending will be oriented to a specific strategy and aim. HAMAA member warriorsesh explains this in his new video in brief response to Shad.
Yep!!!!
The "best weapon" mantle really depends on the individual and the situation
"The best weapon would be a shape shifting mass changing artifact" So a Zerth blade, yup.
I’d love to have a Fn57 in melee era
Looking for a spren weapon from The Stormlight Archive? Yeah that one seems pretty op, especially when you can fly and nigh instantly heal.
I made one of these once, but with more of a consideration for the average Jo here in the States carrying/using weapons. It went something like
Lethality
Handleability
Collateral potential
Complexity
Practicality
and Personality
Lethality was equivalent to your damage criteria. Handleability was sort of like your adaptability. Collateral potential is essentially how dangerous the weapon is to anything aside from your intended target (so anything from a flail with a long chain to a hand grenade). Complexity is how many parts, components, or required accessories the weapon needs in order to function (a firearm would have more than a baseball bat). Practicality is a combination of how easy the weapon is to get a hold of, how many places you can legally or realistically carry, own, or use it, and how much effort you would need to put into being able to fight well with it. And personality is essentially how you are going to be perceived (for better or for worse) if you carry this weapon around, own it, or use it.
Not a bad list for modern carry weapons.
More of this! I love holistic breakdowns that take a weapon out of a narrow mindset and into its broader more historical place.
Very cool and fun. Can you another one with axes and stuff? What about polearms? And let's not forget about the BIG STICK ENERGY.
Also, I ran some calculations based on the prop for Worf's bat'leth. A high-carbon steel version would probably weigh about 4.5 kg. Which isn't nearly nearly as bad as the 5.2 kg canon, but it is still ridiculously heavy, so I suspect it would need some varied thickness to shave off some weight.
Or just space-age-era advanced alloys.
also worth considering that klingons are exceptionally strong compared to humans, they are commonly seen throwing fully grown adults like 4-5 feet into the air
That's why the Doppelsöldner got paid double, and why I have yet to see a modern practitioner who could use one for real. If you haven't trained to be able to hold those swords at full extension, all of the techniques, for at least a minute, you're not strong enough to wield that weapon. (The guys who actually used them would have been incredibly strong, arms, shoulders, fingers, hands and core, and would have likely trained every day from a fairly young age.)
I don't have a ten pound longsword, but I did train with iron staff of that weight in my 20's, and isometrics were a major part of that training, holding the weapon by the end at full extension.
The sledge hammer is much harder than a sword or staff, because all of the weight is at the very end: ruclips.net/video/A6vl1jBI2VE/видео.html
I'm on team lindybeige: spear. It's super easy to use, huge reach, very intimidating. And you can teach a small group of people to effectively use it in like an hour. In an alley (if it's narrow enough) it's still great because no one wants to rush into it. Which is also its defense property. You can keep people at range without too much effort. And the shaft can block swords and axes without too much trouble. Vs other stabby weapons... Hmm... Less great. For everyday carry as personal defense? Well it probably scares people off 😂
How useful it is in civilian life can really depend on where you are too. In a lot of pastoralist societies a spear is a piece of civilian kit; you carry it with you when you go out in the fields to watch your livestock, and use it as a staff to lean on, and as a weapon to run off predators.
@@KartarNighthawk you can also use the spear as a pole for a bindle for travel I guess.
Bad match up against my top pick: The shield.
@@capitalistraven That's why you use them together
Great for a untrained militia. They don’t want to get too close to the enemy. So a weapon that allows them to keep distance while still being effective is great.
Also if your arming peasants best give them something that isn’t great for self defense.
Brilliant video! Would love more of this for other weapon types or armours!
Your video quality has come so far, man. I'm really impressed with the technical quality of your videos. It's never been bad, but dang, dude this video is top notch.
How to rate weapons objectively:
First, determine a scenario in which the weapon will be used. This context is absolutely crucial for establishing criteria for objective evaluation.
Second, establish the ideal capability and functions for a weapon in the given scenario. Also, be sure to rank the functions to know which ones are most crucial.
Third, compare all available weapons that fullfil the established criteria. Give extra consideration to those that can perform the crucial functions.
In the even of an objective tie, use the rule of cool.
1. Conditions of deployment
2. Efficacy in deployment
3. Availability for deployment
These sound good?
@@zeekeno823 Accurate, concise and easy to remember. I like it.👍
Before choosing the coolest one in a tie, choose the weapon that is cheaper
I love that you and Matt actually talk about the different aspects and context that really determine how effective a weapon is. Comparing different weapons with different purposes doesn’t work well, and knowing that is so important. A weapon that’s good at stabbing but not at cutting isn’t bad, it’s just specialized. Some people don’t seem to really understand that, and that’s kinda saddening
Considering the only other youtuber I know involved in the recent discussion was Shadiversity, this is a really weird comment. Everyone I've seen involved in these discussions understand that weapons have a large magnitude of uses and contexts. The only dispute is that certain people think some weapons have low stats when compared to similar weapons and some of those are even low enough to be considered just bad designs. Maybe, the other side of the discussion is underestimating the stats for Bat'leths and nunchucks, but it's just dishonest to say they don't understand that nunchaku are different from sticks or that a Bat'leth is different from a halberd.
@@Alex_Fahey you’re not wrong. I was more referring to anyone who doesn’t realize context matters in terms of weapons. I used to be like that, not understanding fully that each weapon has a purpose and some weapons will be better at one or the other, but that doesn’t make them worse or better than others
Something Shad needs to understand.
@@shawnwolf5961 Yeah while Shad has made some decent points if not thought-provoking ones I find he can get rather arrogant and overzealous about this stuff sometimes. The reality is Shad does not have the martial arts experience or historical expertise that Matt Easton has. Skall is no expert himself but by Shad's own admission Skall has more experience in HEMA and you can tell by the way Shad moves compared to the way Skall moves. Skall also always makes a point to tell us that he is not an expert and understands his limits, sourcing his arguments where possible as well. I am not saying this to hate on Shad as I do think he is often a nice and respectable guy but Shad does not really understand his limits. I mainly watch Shad for his fantasy and storytelling content as that is where he really shines IMHO.
@@shawnwolf5961 Your comment is a fantastic example of "tell me you don't know what you're talking about without telling me you don't know what you're talking about." Shad's videos on the subject are based in comparing them to similar weapons via various objective criteria. Any complaints you have for Shad doing this apply just as well if not more to Skall in this video with his 8 value stat block for weapons.
I can get arguing Shad's wrong with his conclusions (and I would do so), but statements like your's can only be the product of extreme ignorance of his content.
Definitely wanna see more of this, I would love to see this become a series actually. I suggest discussing the katar and the pata, they might seem like one to ones of the dagger and long sword, but I think there are some nuances that warrant discussion all the same.
Probably my favorite video of yours I have seen. Really would love to see more of these.
When designing any kind of scale, I'd recommend trying to look at the extreme edge cases. For reach, that is either the pike or something like a whip, depending on how you define "melee weapon", and probably knuckle dusters (or just your hands). You explored a pretty slim range of weapon types, so once you look at things like a military flail, glaive or pollaxe, the defense and damage ratings you gave the swords may seem a bit weird.
Also, to rate melee weapons, I'd probably go with use cases rather than..."attributes". Something a bit like:
* Usability in battle formations / group fighting
* Usability with one hand (body positioning + shield use)
* Usability to control opponent (hooking weapon + sweeping attacks)
* Usability at close distances
I'd keep these, because they're just too generally useful, depending on opposition:
* Anti-armor ("Usability against armored opponents")
* Reach ("Usability at long distances")
Note that most warriors, and certainly all with the budget for it, carried more than a single weapon, if nothing else then certainly a knife or a dagger on your belt. Both for the case of losing/breaking your main weapon, but also for the case of your opponent getting too close for your main weapon (well, and general utility - a belt knife is still a good tool to have).
These have me in a bit of a quandary:
* Training and experience needed for proficient use
* Everyday carry (legality + practicality)
* Durability
They're definitely things I'd look at for something "my adventurer" would carry, but they depends a bit too much on context and what we actually mean by "best or worst melee weapon". A lance is basically supposed to break, making it a feature. For a single fight/battle, sword hilts eventually starting to rattle (probably) won't become an issue, provided good manufacturing. Everyday carry isn't relevant when choosing a weapon for either a duel or a battle. If we're assuming "best weapon for fully proficient users", ease of training isn't relevant, either.
You covered just about all points I was going to make, so total cudos.
i think in extreme edge cases, its probably also good to take the best versions of a weapon, rather than say, a wall queen 13 pound skull sword made of untempered cheap stainless vs. some bespoke L6 balanced blade of another variety.
Sorry, but you can't just disregard the truly objective facts, like for example, that the spear, due to its superior precision, can aim at individual targets, instead of just at a general are-no, wait, that's the Bren gun vs. the spandau. ( -.-)
This. You can't just say that everything is equal depending on context. Nunchucks are bad regardless of context. No one knowledgeable would grab those off a table full of weapons to defend their life.
@@psycomutt I would say it depends on what the other weapons are.
If all but the Nunchuks are short Daggers the Nunchuk might not be a bad choice.
If the other weapons are Longswords, well that's a completely different stroy.
It all depends on what you are facing, which why it is so hard to say ''this weapon is best weapon''
@@psycomutt No you definitely wouldn't. But you wouldn't shove a mace down your pants while trying to play infiltrator either. You might, however, be able to fold up a pair of nunchuks and bring them with you. They're in the same category of weapons as switchblades, palm pistols, and sword canes: weapons that sacrifice a lot of lethality for being easier to hide.
Gun Jesus
@@KartarNighthawk IIRC nunchucks exist to get around bans on weapons imposed by either Imperial China or Japan. Many of the crazy weapons monks ended up training to use was because they weren't allowed to own weapons of war. Samurai had the same limitation when off the battlefield, which is why martial arts for "lesser" weapons like clubs and war fans exist. Nunchucks specifically evolved out of grain threshers, I believe.
Holy, ive been loving your content even more as for late, sire, continue this type of format
Love the outdoor walk to begin video. Thank you for a enjoyable time.
Only two questions are needed to know if a weapon is good or not
1 does it have a pommel?
2 can it be unscrewed?
So a bottle of Golf de Fleur nail polish is the ultimate weapon then?
@@johndododoe1411 the nail polish will give you looks to kill and the cap will allow you to distract your opponent as you activate your personal nuke. See? Perfect weapon.
There lies the majesty of the pommel, nearly anything can attain it if it try’s hard enough.
havent watched the movie yet, it just started. But I remember several years ago you talked about eating disorders and getting back on track... I would like to congratulate you on the progress bro, you are really looking healthier and better than before, not to mention eyes being more awake. I dont know how you are feeling mentally but physically there is a massive improvement, maybe getting to this point in this comment will mirror the change in mind too, keep up the good work bro.
I find your assessments of these weapons spot-on, honestly.
Nice content skall , you shine on those type of video
Skall, honest question. Would the Messer (either 2h or 1h) be closer to a Longsword or a Katana in Stats?
Those two are already very close, but a kriegsmesser would be closer to a longsword and a single-handed messer closer to a katana.
I'd like to see a Part 2 some day. I'm curious how the humble Arming Sword would measure up.
Entirely a function of the skill and level of training of the person wielding it. What I'm seeing from Historical European on youtube **
I really enjoyed this video, i just thought it was too short!!!! All of a sudden, 30 minutes went by and i still wanted more!
I like your categories and your explanations for each weapon. Im not sure what the bedt word to describe Adaptability is, but i feel what you wanted it to encompass and agree its a good category to represent things that are hard to represent. Like how hard it is to just carry a spear around verse a dagger
I'm very excited for more of these if they come!
I would personally say that a mace (or something similar) is your best melee option. It is easy to carry, very effective in dealing damage, simple in construction, easy to maintain, it deals with armor relatively well, and it leaves your offhand open for whatever you want. I think its strongest point is its simplicity. You do not have to worry about sharpening and maintaining an edge on your mace. There are no nicks and breaks you need to worry about the same way you do bladed weapons. The metal part of the weapon is pretty much always ready to go in a good state. The shafts are also cheap and easy to replace. Their usage is also relatively simple, as you don't have to worry about edge alignment and fancy things like that. You bonk people and it's gonna hurt.
Now lets watch the video.
You could throw the axe and therefore for sacrificing the weapon you gain the reach that these other melee weapons lack. I made tomahawks with my dad and we'd throw them often. Fun times.
Throwing the tomahawk is a gamble as well, it would likely hit with less damage than putting your weight behind the swing
And the telegraphed throw could give the opponent time to react so it might be better to use it as a surprise attack 🤔
@@Phantom-Neon no you've brought valid points for sure, and to most of the extents I agree with you on average. If you're well practiced in throwing tomahawks though, and you've seen the speed they travel and the force that can be generated from a throw, they're still certainly viable, especially if you take the throwers aim and leading in consideration. Of course, you wouldn't want to do this to Miyamoto Musashi, or when you have clearly other means, but it's still viable to some degrees. The amount of kills native Americans got on invading colonials is actually impressive, considering colonials usually charged in with muskets
Situation an whom at dictates such a tactic. You lock eyes with an actual Ninja, Samurai or see a plate armor covered knight last thing you want is to throw a small axe at them knowing they'll probably it dodge easily or block it or in the latest/worst case it'll literally bounce off an you lose it... As I hear it does however take a bit of aggressive response and skill on part of the user to effectively use one though an it is a unique an devestating weapon in CQB if used right
I would say it is risky. Not all axes can be thrown (great dane axe) plus if you miss then congrat, you just made yourself even more vulnerable.
@@florians9949 as I have previously established, a tomahawk for instance is primarily based for this purpose and is not generally ones primary resort for defense. As a secondary, the tomahawk is discarded and someone trained in them could set up shots and lead pretty well with great accuracy. Again, not all axes, of course, but a tomahawk for sure.
Your experience with weapons far exceeds my own, really there is no comparison. In combat though I have found that speed and reach and prediction or anticipation can be sumerized collectively as intiative.
Speed is well speed
Quick is the ability to complete the distance from point a to point B
For example
A compact Boxer can complete the kinetic chian earlier than a longer Boxer
The extension is Compressed
Where it is to the advantage of a long Boxer to enforce a favorable range and keep tight footing
Position is important because the center of gravity may more easily be disturbed and without good training the muscles and reflexes may not adapt or recover from an attack i.e. clumsy from short Boxer who more naturally can create initiative by keeping tight foot work allowing for a kinetic chain be initiated more rapidly, whethercattack feint jab and or move to a better angle of attack a better position.
A short Boxer will be able to step inward and be positioned well with a controlled center point of gravity and connected to the ground (that center point of gravity planted) to hopefully deliver a kinetic chain movement from the ground (point A to the target (point) also from strong offensive position to a weak defensive position: An unstable opponent ideally running their head into your strike.
Awareness of both center points of gravity is very important and training is very important to protect and recover the vector of the kinetic chain and prevent it from used against you, which inevitably one will lose at least some control.
Also I've liked to think of weapons as tools, one needs the right tool for the job. Like a golfer picking out the right putter club driver or whatever I think.
So weapon initiative
And weapon quickness (recovery setup transfer of energy)
Idk. I'm curious as to what you think about this
Two more point are the transfer load of energy and quckness/agility
The ability to adapt a position quickly and precisely (not necessarily accurately) the accuracy could be though of as ability based on intelligence prediction or instictive reflex
Fun stuff. I liked the editing flourishes.
I’d like to see him or shad discuss the Gaffi Stick.
It’s a stick with flanges, a spike and a pommel
Is the pommel detatchable?
@@skasteve6528 its the main feature, comprising 25% of the weapon…
But alas, no
Actually, its more a pommel with a spear attached to the end
That thing the Tuscan Raiders use?
Yeah! It's based off of a club called a Totokia, with a spike for penetrating the skull and a ball behind to smash. Cool weapon.
I loved this. PLEASE do more. We need axes, polearms, warhammers, maces...
And most of all, the pommel.
TLDR version: Axe, hammer (,spear) combos are great for battlefields. Swords are great for everyday carry/self defense
My friends and I have often pondered this conundrum and and turned it into a bit of a game by asking "what medieval weapon would you bring if X" and then specifying what setting and situation we would be dropped into. After doing this a quite a few times we've noticed a trend in our favored weapons (though of course, we might be wrong). Essentially, for a battlefield we would have some sort of hammer-axe (-spear) combo (if we have access to enough armor to feel comfortable without a shield, then we would have a pole axe (so hammer+axe+spear) If not, then we would have a shield and a hand-axe (hammer+axe)). All with the distinction that if we specifically are to be fighting in a properly organized formation, then we would almost always pick whatever weapon the rest of the formation is using. Because while an axe is great, if you're the one guy in a formation of spears with an axe, then you'll most likely be singled out pretty easily. As for everyday carry/self defense, we would have a sword (the exact type of sword varied based on who you ask and where and when the hypothetical takes place). But again, this is the trend, not the perfect ideal. There are exceptions, but for me and my friends this is the default, and were we to be dropped into a historical setting where we would be expected to fight for our survival and were asked what equipment we would want to bring, we would first ask if we get armor, and then we'd ask for an axe, and a sword as backup.
Loved this video and would really love to see more of this. Like some other people have commented, i think a sort of "skill level" or "profeciency" rating would be good, as some weapons are easier to wield effectively than others (ex. club vs sword).
Also, to me the "Adaptability" rating would be split between "environmental" which would have factors like environment and ease of carry, and "matchups" which would be their effectiveness against different weapons (both offense and defense).
The best weapon is the one you got when you need it.
21:50 i personally think a katana should rank a point lower on durability since its made extremely hard so is likely to break especially if you whack an armored opponent with the flat or the spine of the sword
It also has atrocious edge retention and a very small guard, which cannot be used offensively and barely protects the hand.
as far as i'm aware, katana have extremely diverse blade construction, with various hardness's throughout the blade, according to the user or craftsman's intentions
also including material composition, its better just to compare weapons, assuming they have equal production quality, otherwise there's no point comparing them
as any medieval spear or longsword crafted within japan would necessarily be composed according to the same material constraints of said country and in-turn require the similar methods of compensation such as folding, which is necessary to make blades from poor quality steel
@@maxkore278 Thank you.
Too many people believe that the Japanese process exists to make blades indestructible, and not simply to make volcanic iron usable.
@@maxkore278 nope if your working with a poor material theres only so much you can do to improve it with skill alone. if you make two identical swords by the same level of craftmanship with two different material qualities the one with the poor material quality is gonna fail first period. i do agree it does have various hardness's throughout it but it doesn't stop it from breaking when hitting something hard since even the lowest hardness level on a katana is well above that of a normal sword so slapping it with the flat or using the spine for anti armour purposes will break it.
@DatBoiOrly
comparing weapons with different material quality is pointless, for that exact reason
in order to compare them in the first place, rather than compare the materials (which doesn't actually tell us anything about the items themselves), we have to first assume the items being compared are of equal production
otherwise the comparison is just ingenuous, just compare a spring steel sword to a spring steel katana, the end
Great vid Skall, love these fun comparisions making it like a video game RPG stat sheet!
On the Japanese sword LOVE that you included the tachi, but what I would ALWAYS add is that the production length katana (and tachi) you see are close to what the Japanese now term "normal" length. Legally they could be up to around 34 inches in EDO, and many tachi or uchigatana fit tachi in the muromachi (longsword contemporary) could be anywhere between 24 and 38 inches or so. 36 inches plus is getting into odachi territory, and nodachi even longer. So VERY much the same situation as the longsword, what type of Japanese sword? I mean the uchigatana also was often a 60cm or so blade, making them VERY similar to a messer. Tachi you could easily compare to calvary sabres as depending on the size would be a one handed mounted sword. Heavier thick tsuba with o-seppa (spacers) could shift the balance point closer to the hand. I have a repro tachi at around 33 inches long with habaki, and it's surprisingly lively in one hand as it has pronounced fumbari (profile taper) combined with a bo-hi (groove). Many "katana" would have been more one hand oriented than we like to think. Large tsuba were common on the uchigatana mounts as well.
Armor ability would be higher as well than you rate, just because the blade profiles were all over the place just like longswords. Does it have niku (blade meat or appleseed edge geometry) or hira niku (flat edge)? A long kissaki that is reinforced? Kissaki got longer during the Mongol invasions in the Kamakura period specifically to aid in piercing ability.
Most reproductions do not have any niku to speak of as tamashigiri is popular, reinforced tips aren't super popular these days on repros, but where on Hanwei blades. Also their edges would have been less brittle than the reproduction market typically does. Complex laminations also. So more complex and tougher (but probably a bit more bend likely). Grass cutters would be great for unarmored combat, but not armored, and a blade with heavy niku would be more suited for armored combat. Japanese had some pretty gnarly armor, just they never really "closed the gaps" completely like the Europeans did, although for a bunch of years you could consider their shoulder armor as shields...
I really like this. As people already stated below: do more of this and go nuts!
Thanks for the vid!
This is an interesting topic, and I believe should be expanded. I think you're giving the oportunity to other youtubers (schola gladiatoria, shad, etc.) to talk about, say, the morningstar, axes, flails, quarterstaffs and such.
I've been thinking about my own criteria for a while. I came to a similar conclusion as you did, but "Intimidation" was one that I was torn about. The best weapon is one that avoids the need to fight, but at the same time, I think it's too context-dependent.
A nuke is very good for the intimidation factor, but somewhat poor as a self-defence weapon.
Great video idea, please keep up and please rate the spear sword, like the zombie tools one that you reviewed
Finally got the chance to sit down and watch this. Ive been trying since you released it. But i have to say, i really enjoyed it and have to applaud you for admitting bias... However i also agree there. Swords in general are pretty adaptable weapons and can be used in a huge variety of applications, both on their own and with shield or dual wielded with another weapon, when compared to other weapons. Its a sort of jack of all trades that is hard to beat when it comes to giving weapons a score.
Wouldn't a giant toothpick just be a wooden spear? 🤔
I was thinking that too haha
It would be a stick the first and greatest all of weapons
i would love to see you class the one handed and two handed jian style swords by the same criteria. i am curious what you think about them and i think they are different enough from the japanese and european counterparts that they deserve to be talked about more. purely from a looks standpoint they are some of my favorites and they certainly be quite effective.
When I was training with Katana I was taught to use the blunt back for parrying opponents blades and sharp edge for striking.
You can also grab the back end to half sword or push in for close range tearing. Same thing with a dao.
What a truly fascinating and in-depth study. I have never seen anyone have this flexible a view.
Great video. Context matters.
I'm more of a firearm guy (California bans the carry of dirks, whatever those are, so we have to settle for handgun permits) but even with guns these arguments apply. I think the biggest problem is that people a apply their particular situation to other people that live in different circumstances and then invest emotion into their own personal preferences. If you like a different weapon than I do, you are obviously insulting me on a very personal level. Everyone needs to relax.
Unless we are talking about nun-chucks then the gloves come off. Nothing is better than debating about a pair of sticks that have been tied together.
Estoc
Damage: 3
Anti-Armour: 6 (Was used for penetrating gaps in armour)
Durability: 6 (Was even used for boar hunting it was so durable)
Speed: 3
Reach: 4 (Some were up to 130cm long)
Defence: 3.5
Adaptability: 5 (Could easily be used with the mordhau grip, was also used as a lance)
Affordability: 1
Estoc is such an underrated sword type. What other sword can replace a knight’s broken lance?
I did this for a game I'm deciding.
Great work! But I instead of adaptability, I did Concealability, basically how easy is it to carry around or carry it without it being noticed.
The dagger is a wonderful weapon in that case.
Lovely intro Skall, I wouldn't mind full blown videos filmed like that, whatever they may be about lol.
Do any companies that make those composite type practice weapons make a Batleth? It would interesting to see you actually duel against a variety of other weapons.
I always assumed a lot of the spear's power was that spears coordinate with each other very well in group fights.
That's mainly pikes and polearms
@@PeterJavi Greek hoplite enters the chat, and disagrees.
useful system you came up with acknowledging that a lot depends on circumstance and setting. different tools for different situations. i think the oft contested comparisons between long sword and katana was fair examining the strength and weakness of both.
i hope you will do more comparisons in the future.
the Batlav was quite a surprise.
That Castlevania SOTN colosseum Background. Thumbs up sir! You have great taste.
I was disappointed you didn't include a bo, or staff as it were it's nothing more than a walking stick. But it can have great results in combat. A staff in my case is a minimum of 6 ft long. I really enjoy you content. Keep it up. It makes me think of different situations, and applications.
But.. a staff is just a spear without the blade.
This video is amazing and has a unique Skall style to it, great stuff.
Very well thought out video. Informative and good editing to keep the viewer attention from drifting off. I especially liked the intro hiking in woods. It shows that you’re more than just eat ,sleep & dream about weapons. Ha ha ha ! Thank you.
I'd love to see this with more weapons. It was fun watch.
I was hoping you would address what happened to the Nunchuck video, why it got removed and if it will be uploaded elsewhere or through a private link on RUclips. Maybe bring it up on your Community tab just to give us a heads up. I really liked that video and only got to watch it one time before it was removed :(
I was confused by that too.
You're missing an important criteria: Status or Impressiveness.
Specially for civilian weapons, they were not principally carried for defence (a king would never actually have to draw his sword to protect himself, there are bodyguards for that). But looking, impressive, fashionable and radiating status was critical. Of course, this is so highly context dependent (and individual item dependent) that it's basically unscorable. Which is also kind of the.
I want to cut my toenails... NEVER!!!
I'd argue that that's a separate issue from rating the weapon as a weapon. It's certainly important to consider the ways in which certain weapons were status symbols and how that impacted their utility as weapons. But, especially when looking at general types rather than specific examples, it feels like a tangential consideration.
Also the status or impressiveness of a weapon changed over time. At 1 point rapiers were what a gentleman of any status wore. Eventually they became what old/out of touch/lesser people wore, and the new hotness was small swords just as rapiers had supplanted longswords.
Sure, but that's not something that has any bearing on the effectiveness as such.
@@Skallagrim It has, if you think of a weapon as more than a tool for fighting. Effectiveness at showing status and class is just as - if not more - important than effectiveness at fighting. It's like judging clothes solely by how good they are at keeping you warm. Sure, that's one of their functions, but your missing out on a lot by ignoring their "fashion" use.
Love it. Like the use of combinations and environments.
These kind of video are so cool, would love to see other like this one
I think part of why longsword did so well is that you gave it both the benefits of being an every day carry weapon with the benefits of being used with gauntlets, which didn't happen with the other weapons. As an every day weapon, you typically wouldn't have gauntlets, and suddenly it loses a bit on anti-armor because half-swording and murder stroke become more dangerous to yourself, and it arguably loses some on defense.
It arguably could use separate scores for every day use and battlefield use, and that alone points to a high versatility that few other weapons have.
For adaptability, you could set six arbitrary combat situations, each representing one point of scale.
The general direction of the rating is fine but id change some points which would make a difference. Usability/finesse is a factor to add. That clingon weapon even easier to use as a dagger in my opinion. Combination of weapons or shields with an empty hand is making it more complex but no ones holding a dagger with two hands so its not a fair comparison... Id like more videos of this! :)
IF your interested there was a special weapon created in the late 1800s for the Kolonial army Marrechaussee in particular , its called the Klewang , it was based on a local machete type weapon and adapted and changed to fit close quarters jungle combat. Its still in use as ceremonial purpose but is also a verry verry nasty weapon.
The problem with melee combat is that if you're outnumbered, 8 times out of 10 you've already lost. If you're going on an adventuring career, just learn how to be stealthy and use a bow. Don't fight, just murder.
Historically that really doesn't prove to be the case so many times - training and equipment make a huge difference as does leadership - if you manage the battle properly, use terrain to your advantage, manage fatigue levels of the front line you can make up for numbers, and if you have better equipment too... Even on the smallest scale this proves true - two people fighting together (perhaps shield and sword/axe/1h-spear - some weapons for which the buddy next to you really can exploit the opening you make and protect you) can for example hold a bridge against a much greater number of less skilled, less co-ordinated or just worse equipped combatants.
Not saying numbers don't help, as clearly they do but I would say in any historical battle I know of where numbers have been significantly different its still often the smaller side that 'wins', I'd say at least 40% of the battles that pop into my head and fit the smaller group wins - partly as often in these battles you have well hardened experienced warriors against the local militia, or the well established defenders against the horde at the gate type situations - even if that 'gate' is just a big hill the other side have had to run up to get to you first...
Ah, the stealth archer, aka, almost everyone’s first Skyrim character! Lol.
@@foldionepapyrus3441 looks like you’re talking about something else than the OP. You’re assuming a battle. He’s assuming at most a small group (3-5 people.)
@@foldionepapyrus3441 from the way OP say it, I think he's talking about one individual. One has lost in melee combat should they be outnumbered therefore it is better for one to be trained in stealth and the bow. One shouldn't fight one's opponents if one is outnumbered, simply murder one's opponents.
@@nathanielkidd2840 Not really, he specifically mentions what two people can do against a higher number of opponents on the very first paragraph.
A war hammer would be fun to see. The first two categories would need more dots.
If I had to choose I would pick the Warhammer.
would honestly love to see more of this but the using different types of weapons per video, so rating a weapon in just its "family" of weapons and not with every weapon in mind, like not comparing a dagger with a longsword, but daggers with daggers
Spear is also King of Cookout. Now, I can roost a weenie over the campfire and pass it to the desired human. The fire usually gets too hot. The length of the shaft, keeps enough distance from the fire.
You can definitely rank order weapons. If there's a rack full of (same class) weapons, which is the most likely to be disregarded in almost all scenarios? Spear would get picked in most scenarios and nunchucks would be ignored in all but maybe very special circumstances.
They may have useful at some point in time, but with our accumulated knowledge we can rank order them.
Additionally spear would be ignored for DNA-recognizing swarm of murderous nanobots.
In a modern context, where you're trying to defend yourself by ending an attack fast, nothing beats a Flat Leather Sap, Blackjack, or Soft Lead-Shot Filled Sap, for a weighted bludgeon that is also portable, usually has a strap for retention, and wrapped in leather to reduce bounce during impact. They're also tried and tested for hundreds of years by police departments, militaries, and on the wild west frontier. There's several good quality makers that I've purchased from in Canada.
I spy someone that comes from Object History.
Other than guns of course. Knuckledusters are pretty effective too.
I would say a high lumen flashlight is the best personal self defense tool. You can non lethally disable someone without getting into striking range. With the added benefit of being legally to carry everywhere.
@@williamjenkins4913 A good flashlight is a critical piece of kit. I like mace as a non-lethal deterrent as well. It's good option between a strong word and a gun that is surprisingly effective.
@@hookedblades6471 Guns aren't that good for actually defending yourself, they're more for intimidation. Even highly trained police officers only hit 34% of their shots in high-stress situations, and most people aren't highly trained, especially not under stress.
I would definitely like to see more lists like this , you could do blunt weapons and type vs type
Always gratifying when answering the titles question before clicking on the video and being proven correct.