Deadliest Weapon

[Jake Norwood]

But I think Mike makes a really good point in that you don't really have a reach advantage, or much of one, with the longsword. The blade is the same length, or close to it, and the two-handed grip actually shortens reach in many situations.

The longsword's main advantage is leverage, especially in any kind of bind or blade-on-blade action. The buckler largely neutralizes that. S&B is nasty, man!

Jake

[Jordan Hinckley]

However as it is only a blocking weapon if one can keep it out of play or grossly unusable the mobility of the longsword can be better used. If one can line their opponent up essentially sideways then either the sword has to come over the buckler to attack or the buckler is out completely on the other side. given the control one has with a longsword versus just a short sword, if you can attack from either side or push heavily to one side or the other the S&B can be a major disadvantage, again assuming similar skill levels.

[william_cain_iii]

As much as a longsword proponent as I am, Buckler is not only a blocking weapon, ohhh no.

It's a striking weapon with two modes of attack.

First is the broad mode, wherein the whole surface of the buckler is shoved against you, like a shield would be shoved. This virtually guarantees contact with your body, and can be used to stun or push away someone. Having had it happen, it hurts, can potentially break bone, and is not something done 'defensively.'

The other is the narrow mode in which the buckler is turned edgewise to impact you with the rim of the shield. This -will- break bone if done with a martial degree of force. Imagine an object moving as fast as a punch, then concentrating the force of that punch onto an edge narrower than your finger, and hitting you along the eyes or the ridge of your nose.

The buckler is a weapon, in every since of the word.

[John Harmston]

And that's assuming you aren't using a spiked buckler.

Additionally, occasionally shields (and presumably bucklers) would have certain portions of their rims sharpened.

Also, I will mention that in the hands of a skilled practitioner, cutting over a buckler does not take it out of the fight.

[Jordan Hinckley]

And that's assuming you aren't using a spiked buckler.

Additionally, occasionally shields (and presumably bucklers) would have certain portions of their rims sharpened.

Also, I will mention that in the hands of a skilled practitioner, cutting over a buckler does not take it out of the fight.

I would not say it is taken out completely, but is definitely more difficult to do than a strike that is not over or around it.

[Liam Rose the Just]

Sword and buckler against sword and dagger? By the way, try to give a straightforward answer on which would be superior. None of this, "its the fighter" replies.

[Myles Cupp]

Sword and buckler against sword and dagger? By the way, try to give a straightforward answer on which would be superior. None of this, "its the fighter" replies.

There is a short ARMA clip of some folks sparring with S&B vs. S&D. Judge the results for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7caqj8w7Ak

And part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OcBPCe2KJw

Curiously enough, our very own esteemed Jake Norwood is listed as being one of the fighters in this video so perhaps he can give some context for us.

[Jake Norwood]

I'm the guy with the buckler in those vids. Caveat: I'm an absolute novice buckler fighter...and have been for years!

The buckler is much, much easier to defend with than the dagger. The dagger's added offensive capability doesn't make up for that, in my opinion.

I know Liam (btw, is "Rose the Just" your last name--check our policy on names) asked that he not get a "depends on the fighter" answer, but it kinda does. Not so much which fighter is better, but which fighter's style is better complimented by the chosen tool.

In a "thrustier" fight, I'd prefer the dagger. In a more cut-centric fight, give me the buckler.

Jake

[John Harmston]

The buckler is much, much easier to defend with than the dagger. The dagger's added offensive capability doesn't make up for that, in my opinion.

+1

This matches my experience and opinion.

[Liam Rose the Just]

Alright, I think there a lot of great responses to the subjects, and thank you all of that. Now, if it depends on the fighter using the weapon, how about this? What weapon best fits the style of the fighter, as in aggressive or defensive?