Which animals could a human kill with swords?

[djacobox372]

A sword will cause a lot of damage on any land animal. It would have to be like a fucking blue sperm whale to not get totally fucked up.

What makes you think a man could score an effective blow before getting the sword knocked out of his hand by the animal who is twice as strong and three times as fast?

 

[Pizza Werewolf]

Geese

 

[Headkicktoleg]

What makes you think a man could score an effective blow before getting the sword knocked out of his hand by the animal who is twice as strong and three times as fast?

I mean even if you just stab as your dying move you still will kill the animal

 

[Krallang]

What makes you think a man could score an effective blow before getting the sword knocked out of his hand by the animal who is twice as strong and three times as fast?

A real sword would slice through any limb, jaw or body part that got in the way. It's why man developed shields and armor.

Give a man a shield in most of these encounters and I'd say with experience yes. For the right man 1v1. All in all Humans are a pack species. We wouldn't be hunting Apex Predators solo in truth.

 

[shunyata]

Historically, the spear is a much better evidence based weapon for hunting lion, tiger, and boar than the sword is (and literally any dangerous or non dangerous game).

The sword is more of a dueling weapon, a sign of nobility like a sidearm on an officer.

The spear is the fundamental weapon of mankind in hunting and pre gunpowder warfare.

 

[HARRISON_3]

New and "improved" Adele

 

[Krallang]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katar_(dagger)

I'm more Impressed with the spiked fist in the tigers mouth.

 

[louiscyphere]

If you infuse with fire magic the possibilities are endless

 

[chosey whales]

A tigger and a Pooh bear

 

[Demented]

Historically, the spear is a much better evidence based weapon for hunting lion, tiger, and boar than the sword is (and literally any dangerous or non dangerous game).

The sword is more of a dueling weapon, a sign of nobility like a sidearm on an officer.

The spear is the fundamental weapon of mankind in hunting and pre gunpowder warfare.

True, longswords were used on battlefields at certain points in history such as the battle of Crecy in the 100 years war ,but in general spears then poleaxes were the assualt/battle rifles of the day while swords were more like duty pistols and daggers like a daily carry piece. Pietro Monte an Italian (or Spanish) mercenary also mentions using two handed swords on battlefields but its very brief basic stuff.

Longswords/hand and a half/ bastard swords etc were mostly duelling weapons but single handed swords were pretty common as sidearms and the Langes Messer was common in the Holy Roman Empire among peasants, burghers, nobles and is basically a machete/sword.

The average spearman or soldier with a poleaxe would most likely wreck a master swordsman.

 

[Blayt7hh]

Hunting swords were a thing too. Havnt looked too much into the history though.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunting_sword

It says those were used for finishing wounded game though

I’m thinking large cats and bears are still going to win if you have a sword

 

[horc00]

A sword will cause a lot of damage on any land animal. It would have to be like a fucking blue sperm whale to not get totally fucked up.

I could most definitely kill a beached whale with a sword.

 

[hohner]

A sloth.

 

[raty tat tat]

An ant.

 

[djacobox372]

Historically, the spear is a much better evidence based weapon for hunting lion, tiger, and boar than the sword is (and literally any dangerous or non dangerous game).

The sword is more of a dueling weapon, a sign of nobility like a sidearm on an officer.

The spear is the fundamental weapon of mankind in hunting and pre gunpowder warfare.

A spear changes things, but we're talking about swords.

A spear gives greater range and a stronger grip which would make it far more effective against a charging animal, much better odds, but my $$ is still on tiger/bear/wolf/croc

 

[JOE QUEEF]

I could most definitely kill a beached whale with a sword.

 

[eternaldarkness]

But gladiators competing in this type of matches were not trainned, i belive actuall swordsman could defeat lions and tigers

not sure if serious. they even had a class of gladiator that specialised in fighting animals.

 

[Yoel Bromero]

I read it as humans killing animals that were equipped with swords.

Monkeys, racoons, and anything with thumbs is going to be a big big problem in this scenario.

Cats and bears couldn't hold a sword with cutting themselves so I imagine the swords are duct tapes to a limb for swinging or flat on the back for a stab charge. I think the cats and bears win every match even if they don't figure out the sword game.

Frogs and all amphibians would be wrecked, don't let the lies battle toads or ninja turtles told us intimidate you. No amphibian with a sword is taking out a sherdogger.

Animals better not get a hold of swords is what I've learned tonight.

 

[Demented]

Well you won't beat this animal with a sword

 

[Bangkok ready d1]

not sure if serious. they even had a class of gladiator that specialised in fighting animals.

Yes but they also used animals as execution method, gladiators were slaves some had training but many of them were just normal people that were forced to fight, it was not uncommon to basically put someone against a lion or tiger as a form of punishment