Thanks for the input! The idea of protecting your gun with your off hand or just switching to an open hands system is what we've got now, more or less. It's the transitional issues that interest me. For example last night we were sparring with a move called "travelling through," where we meet in a bind, I smash up hard with the crossguard, keep the sword going and eventually have it dangling from my left hand over my back as I do a high-low takedown, then flip it around, grab the blade in my right hand, and skewer the foe on the ground. Works better than you might imagine, but it seems to me that division between shooting and melee fighting in our current systems make that kind of fluid incorporation of the firearm more difficult. The most recent complete system was probably bayonet and buttplate combat, which flowed back and forth from shooting at least in theory. And while kind of questionable in modern combat for obvious reasons, for those not in combat it's not a bad idea to be able to switch quickly both because of the prospect of a surprise grapple and because you may have to reduce your defensive force to stay on the law side of things.
Quote:
|
At hand to hand range it can be argued that an edged weapon (e.g. the Roman gladius) is as lethal as a firearm,
|
That's truer than most realize. The things you can do with a sword are shocking, and the speed even from a slow old man is faster than all but the very best gun draws. It's probably just as well so few people know how to cut with blades in combat anymore.
Just so we're clear, this is the kind of sword fighting I'm referring to, not the fun nerf stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38sVdx7nzhQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln94E9AGYTc