Military Gear & Army Surplus Gear Blog

Sword “Breaker” or Sword “Catcher”?

Sword “Breaker” or Sword “Catcher”?

hi it’s Tod of Tod’s Workshop and Tod
Cutler here and today we’re going to talk about the “Sword Breaker”. Curious
shape blade. So we’ve got these tines on the back here
which are designed for another blade a swordsman’s blade to land between them
and for you then to be able to control them and I’ll demonstrate that in a bit,
but coming back to the name “Sword Breaker” now I’m not exactly certain
where the name came from but I think it has to be one of these stupid Victorian
reinventions where they didn’t fully understand the purpose of something but
they felt they had to catalogue it and give it a use and sound all
knowledgeable so they called it sword breaker. Now that’s not its true purpose,
its true purpose is to block and bind blades so it’s used as a left-hand dagger
and main gauche and it has some features to it that are slightly unusual the
first thing that you would think is a main gauche well it’s used in the left
hand and you use the rapier in the right the thumb ring here which is the
hand protection is on the wrong side of the blade so any
other main gauche this ring would be on the other side but what that tells you
in fact is that the way you hold this blade is not with edge downward as you
would expect it’s with edge upward so actually the edge is now upward and
these teeth are downward that’s one thing which is slightly unusual about it
another thing which is worth noting is medieval daggers and Renaissance daggers,
very often you put them in a leather scabbard. This one has to have a wood lined
scabbard just like a sword does. The reason for that is if you put it in a
leather scabbard the tines actually just bind on it and you can’t draw the thing
out so it needs to have a wood core scabbard. Now the other thing about a
main gauche is it is a left hand weapon so your rapier is here on your left hip and
you can draw that but that means that it’s your right hand which is having to
draw the dagger itself the main gauche and so crossing over to do that while
you’re trying to do that is always quite complicated so the main gauche is very
often worn at the back here and so that way what you’re able to do is just grasp
it with your left hand draw it and you’re ready
then the other thing is is the teeth that is quite frankly a hell of a thing
to make it’s they’re really quite difficult and there’s ways that you can
make it easier or different ways that you can approach it and so all of these
things you see in museums. There’s not that many of of this type of dagger but
there certainly enough out there to see that there are different ways of making
them, sometimes the teeth are actually filed or punched, from the main body of the
blade itself, other times these teeth are in fact
braised on and again you might think the braising is a weak process but if the
joint is tight and good fitting a braised joint can be very strong so actually the
flanges on gothic medieval 15th century mace for instance, you know the really
spiky evil-looking maces, those those are often braised on as well, so these teeth
can be braised on, they could be forged welded or they could be cut from the
single blade itself it all depends how they maker a wanted to do it. These teeth
as well sometimes they’re fixed, sometimes are actually articulated so
they they move, they have a little axle in there, a little pivot, and the teeth
just fold down out of the way so that it makes it easier for the blade to enter
so there’s a wider gap but then it closes up as you try to pull the blade
from it so those are really the features of this kind of knife, absolutely
fascinating thing, and I’ve pondered about how they be used for a
long time so that’s why we’re here now. So I have my assistant Hob here who’s
going to help with the swordplay. In the interest of full disclosure here neither
Hob nor I is a sword fighter so sorry about all the bumbling idiocy
that is about to occur but you’re going to understand how the weapon works from
this. So Hob’s coming in for a thrust I’ve now been able to block it between
the tines of the blade and I’ve bound it so now I’ve bound the blade and simply
by pulling there’s nothing Hob can do about it so I can I can twist it I can
pull it I can even push it to an extent so I’ve got complete control, or
reasonably good control, over his blade so it’s these tines are just a really
clever little thing. This type of main gauche is called a sword breaker now I
don’t think that there’s enough meat in here to break that blade, the blade it
self at this point on a rapier might be four millimeters thick so somewhat over
eighths of an inch I can’t see that and simply if you’re trying to break that
you’re having to apply force and that amount of force is just gonna pull it
straight out of a guy’s hand what is interesting as well is and this
is what I don’t quite understand if something works you see lots of it and
you don’t see that many of these so clearly although as far as I can tell it
works fantastically there must have been something that wasn’t quite right about
it in a day to day fighting in the street kind of context because you don’t
see thousands of these things and you would expect to see that so what is
notable about these is something that I’m gonna do now I didn’t allow the
blade to enter between the times because the angle between the sword and the
dagger was not enough and there it pops in and so basically if you miss your
your parry that is where it may be a disadvantage to you because you were
expecting that bind but actually you now don’t get it a new pull so if the thing
fails it leaves you wide open if you are not allowing for it. That leads me to suggest
that they had some benefit and they had a reason and they were a very interesting
route to look at, but ultimately they must have been a failure because there
aren’t that many of them and perhaps it’s simply this… this failure, this
occasional failure when you are relying on it to do something and it doesn’t,
that was enough to sink it as an object thank you so I’ve now bound his blade I can pull
it I can twist it straight

Reader Comments

  1. Thank you for this video. I'd suggest that the "failure" might just be that most people would prefer a shield instead.

  2. With regards to swordplay, every milli second you can interrupt, delay, confuse your opponent is worth your life basically. Imho why this isn't used much is that you need to be skilled and quick. And on the battlefield its mostly heavy weapons and daggers. You are not going to stop a two hander or a dagger with this. So the situation where this is useful is small. And then a regular lighter dagger is better.

    Anyway that's my own logic:)

  3. Even if you did manage to lock your opponents blade, couldn't he just counter that by stepping forward and to your left rather than trying to pull it back. I've seen quite a few martial arts techniques that works because our natural reaction is to do one thing and you counter those techniques by doing the opposite.

  4. My thoughts on the matter:
    -Sword "breaker" may refer to breaking an enemies sword attack
    -We don't see many of these because 1. they must have been ridiculously expensive compared to a normal dagger, making it out of reach for most people. Just watch Alec Steele's series on the swordbreaker. you could probably buy 10 normal daggers compared to one breaker 2. useless on the battlefield compared to a shield 3. only works against swords, which not many people carried.
    -Those three facts make this a rich persons dueling weapon. Nothing a "normal" person used at the time

    Would love to hear other people's opinions on my thoughts

  5. Yeah.. so I own a sword breaker but I suck at swordfights. Which is why I died even with such expensive and fancy weapon in my hand. Then you see a master swordsman that easly binds your sword and "breaks" your sword by making it completly ineffective in combat. Thats the only way I could have named it sword breaker, in not the most direct name sense but in more symbolic by making the sword useless like a stick against armor.

  6. I disagree, cost is what made it rare, nobles most likely had them , and you had it upside Down, it's made for capture of attackers blade chopping down after a his Parry.

  7. Just a thought. Perhaps they were too complicated/expensive to make? And or finding someone to teach a two weapon fighting style was difficult?

  8. Are you not assuming you are up against a high quality blade?
    if the handle is welding on it might break it right away.

  9. Speaking as a fencer to your issues with not getting the bind, there are techniques you can employ to achieve the bind you're going for. For starters, many of the masters in period as well as many of the better fighters today point out that, while an off-hand dagger can be incredibly useful in a fight, your best defense remains with your sword. One technique that was employed would be to parry with the sword and then transfer the contact to the dagger. This will afford you the time to line up the correct approach to gain your bind and then free your sword to make an attack.
    However, if your intention is to utilize the dagger as a primary defense and your parry fails to achieve the bind, the good thing is that you still parried the blow. Should your opponent leave the blade engaged long enough, you can achieve the bind by simply raising the point of the weapon. In addition to presenting a better approach towards gaining the bind, this will increase the angle of your engagement affording you access to the weaker part of your opponent's sword.
    Final point I'll bring up is that, while the sword-breaker style wasn't widely used, daggers were. I imagine if there is a reason why the sword breaker wasn't widely used it would be the expense and skill it would take to successfully create one. I have been watching Alex Steele make one of these weapons the past few months on his channel. Armed with modern techniques, equipment, and materials, he has still had significant difficulty, up to and including destroying his first attempt. His second attempt is arguably only as successful as it is because he had it plasma cut instead of forging a second attempt himself. In period, the ability to fabricate long lightweight blades that were able to thrust was still pretty new, an atypical blade geometry had to be even more difficult to accomplish.

  10. a rapier isn't a slashing weapon, it's more of a thrusting weapon, whereas when using a sword breaker to parry and attempt to catch the thrusting rapier, there is a huge margin for error, which would definitely not be in your favor.

  11. On the question of effectiveness, it occurs to me that an opponent could just twist their sword blade slightly for a moment to make sure it didn't get caught in the sword-catcher. So against an opponent who knows about sword-breakers, it'd be pretty useless.

  12. Wouldn't you break your wrist if you caught a large sword, or a sword swung at full power?

    I don't think that would be very effective against a bastard sword or claymore.

  13. I'm thinking that if you actually stabbed someone with it and it went far enough in that those barbs were well into the body, it might not be that quick to remove.

    Probably something that someone thought was a good idea until they actually used it and found out that it wasn't. Kind of Darwinistic… People who used it ended up dead, thus it didn't become popular… I think I'll stick with my .45ACP M1911…

  14. As someone that has practiced blade-based martial arts for a while and done a lot of blade sparring I think he is spot on with his reasoning why these did not take off. It appears to be something that is very complex to pull off and needs a lot of coordination and mental focus and still will probably just work half the time if you do it perfectly because there are many things that go wrong. Plus, if you try to pull off this kind of a catch and fail, you will have probably moved into a distance that might prove very problematic if the things that you assume to happen do not. Its the simple, reliable things and concepts that you really have mastered that will win you a fight, not a set of a billion fancy secret stuff tricks.

    Plus a lot of spikes and angles on the blade might also cause some rather unpredictable stuff happening depending where the blow hits, so it might spoil your last ditch manuever from working when you really need it. Theres enought stuff happening in this kind of a situation that you cannot predict, there is no need to add to this.

    I would rather have a buckler or a flat left-hand dagger. Its way more straightforward, you put it in the way of the blow and its deflected and you limit the opponents options by some margin. In most cases thats pretty predictable and a safe bet, which is what I want. There is a reason why most spikey, evil-looking things on swords and shields belong into the realm of fantasy. They simply do not really work.

  15. Love this 4:00 + where the swordsman wont fight back in the slightest… like all those martial arts videos before in kung fu, wing tsung, karate and so on… if he fought back your sword breaker is a shit, simple as that

  16. You would have to be good with that thing to capture the sword. The right timing under the right angle. If you draw back without capturing the sword, you have now opened your left flank to the thrust of the sword. Your next of kin will be notified.

  17. I would argue that the blade sliding if angled wrong is still out weighed with the added benefit of a good practiced bind, my main thoughts on why there weren't millions of them is the time to make Vs only minor benefit of use, they would be super expensive and labor intensive I should imagine so that probably made them scarce too. That said they would also be pretty useless against a broader blade too I should imagine

  18. Its amazing to me how many people don't realize that "break" also means stop or disrupt.

    You can break your concentration, take a break, build a breakwater, etc…
    Its doesn't just mean destroy.

  19. Maybe there isn't that many of them because they were harder to produce and therefore they required a more experienced smith and were therefore more expensive and seen as an unnecessary expense.

  20. The lower quality steel common to most blades would have resulted in a sword breaker snapping quite easily. Whether it was the tines or the blade itself. They are quite limiting as well as you demonstrated.

    Not something to rely on.

  21. Also it’s likely that if someone stabs you with that if they stab low enough it’ll catch your intestines and drag them out which is insanely painful I have heard and would imagine

  22. Surely A specialty weapon, expensive and only makes sense for a practicing sword fighter who was highly skilled and trained with this back-up weapon (Not every person carrying the ‘Status Symbol’ of a sword used it) Quit similar to the Samurai class who carried swords (But also doctors and high civil servants) there where the specialty weapons to have a ‘edge’ over their opponents.
    For instance a iron fan could be used to wave air on A hot day, could be used to give commando’s on the battlefield or was used as a concealed weapon to give or deflect blows.
    The police force of the samurai used a “Jitte” sword catcher that looked like a Sai with one arm.
    The “jitte” or “jutte” had like a lot of Japanese weapons a special martial art; Jitte-Jutsu. Then their was the “Kabuto-Wari” or “Helm Breaker” to fight against armored opponents.
    Again those are specialty weapons wich are rare and certainly interesting for specialist or arms collectors.y

  23. Just thinking off the top of my head (not an expert) I've been catching up on history, and swords were so common as to replace axes, spears and other weapons. Sword catchers only works on swords; so, having a weapon that only counters one weapon is of limited benefit.

  24. Interesting and educational videos, and it seems even the comment sections is full of friendly people(mostly), I have some binge watching in my future 🙂

  25. I'm going to guess speed was its downfall. Rapier type thrusts can come in fast, but exit just as fast. Much like a boxer's punch, you don't want to leave it hanging out there while you're at full thrust and exposed. Also in the same boat as a wrist lock in modern fighting. Sure, in theory it works but getting that lock on at full speed isn't practical. So a lot of extra cost for a low probability outcome.

  26. I wonder what the Victorians would have called the "Chinese Sword Breaker" from Cold Steel:

  27. Reason they weren't popular is probably they weren't very practical. You don't need to trap an opponent's sword, you only need to push it out of the way to create an opening, or parry it to prevent him from striking or blocking your strike, both of which would take a split of a second, trapping the blade is unnecessary. Also you're as much trapped as he is and if you're at a closer distance, which is likely, after locking blades once, it will work to his advantage, cause he's got a short weapon in his free hand and you won't be able to break distance, because your off hand is lodged to his rapier. Not to mention accidental lodging and dislodging will totally mess your moves up, not knowing what to expect. It's too complicated to use, lots of things that can go wrong and doesn't really give you anything more than an overkill grip on your opponents blade, that might not always work to your advantage. Fencing is "touch and move", holding in one place is considered a mistake and is easily exploited by a skilled opponent. Also if you in a larger fight, not a duel and manage to trap your opponent's sword and kill him, than you need to divert time and attention for dislodging his blade, before moving on to the next one, time and attention you might not have to spare. That's just off the top of my head, need to do some sparring with it to tell more, but I guarantee it won't be very effective against a trained fencer. It's like one of those complicated martial arts move, that fail against a trained boxer, simply because he sticks to the basics and does not allow you to unfold your move.

  28. What if the teeth were tilted towards the opponent. Would that eliminate the chances of a sword slipping? Tod maybe you could make one with tilted teeth to experiment?

  29. I've read some about these blades. There was a specific fighting style associated with "sword breakers." It was extremely intricate and hard to learn, even harder to use effectively. Im sure there were masters of this style that were very effective in combat. However i imagine most commoners of the time just didn't have the time or luxury to train in complicated swordplay techniques. So they died out.

  30. also popular method of binding your opponents sword is just to grab it with your gloved hand after stopping it with your mainhand sword. Wouldn't be surprised to discover your hand words better than this knife.

  31. break didnt mean to destroy but instead to break its use. eventually the word split into 2. break meaning to separate and brake meaning to slow

  32. 1:15 or more simple, and it's a supposition, the dagger was made for a left handed swordsman (so the Rapier in the left and the dagger in the right hand). As i think the primary purpose of this dagger it wasn't to broke swords but to have that control you suggested to use the rapier with the other hand for an almost sure hit

  33. 5:48

    It's probably one extreme or the other. Either it is as you stated, and can leave one vulnerable if it fails, or it was so effective that no one was willing to make the first move. Then fighting reached would quickly reach a stalemate, so everyone had to go back to the old way of fighting.

  34. Is it possible that this type of dagger was given by kings and lords to their special servicemen (spies, bodyguards) only because of the difficulty of production? They must have cost a fortune. You don't see many purple garments from before 1856 but that doesn't mean a large proportion of said garments wasn't made. Although on that note, I always wondered why they didn't just use blue and red…

  35. I believe it's for a dual wielding person I do not think it's just intended for single hand use if you only had a brain pirates used it

  36. Maybe it was used in combination with a sword parry, where the opponents sword slides down your sword to hit the sword breaker which was placed across your blade. It would be easier to control the angle that way and a failure wouldn't be as fatal.

  37. I think the reason this never took off was the fact that if you stabbed someone with it, you'd never get it out! And it clearly isn't an economic strategy to be constantly buying these, due to the massive amount of time and money it must take to build one.

  38. This is clearly one of the most informative channels about sword fighting on YouTube (and a lot more concise than others, too). Thank you for sharing!

  39. Sword catcher, sword breaker.
    You can't stitch up those wounds, it's a deliberate weapon meant to make you bleed out as I see it

  40. I imagine another downside to this is when you are fighting multiple enemies, you may be able to lock one opponent’s blade that attacks, but whilst you’re tangled, you’re open to attacks from others

  41. ever tried to block a sword midswing with basically just a dagger in your left hand? especially if you need to hold it this way, you cannot really stop the momentum of the attackers swing. you may catch the sword, but get hit anyway. And if i could choose between catching a sword with my dagger AND my ribs or just blocking a hit with a shield….gonna take the shield

  42. I think the term of this weapon or a gauge as sword breaker shouldn't be taken too literally like we tend to in modern times with more scientific, more precise descriptions.
    I ever saw the name as a colorful phrase to 'break' through the defense of the sword and 'breaking it' through taking away its mobility and allow with a secondary weapon to 'break through'. In that light the term 'sword breaker' sounds also more poetic and, as you would say today, more 'sexy' (Man, I do loath that term 'sexy' from sales people. ) to sell instead of a 'sword blocker' or 'sword catcher' which what it factually is. But I am sure you agree those terms would sell it less well?

    And about the last comment that it was not very common and that it fails to catch. In opposite to a shield which is a little easier to handle for even an untrained person, a gauge or sword breaker is more like a very specialist, 'active' shield like defense weapon which in an ideal case can allow to grab the blade but still allows to deflect the longer attacking blade and counter attack with the secondary weapon before the attacker can withdraw his sword for a new attack.
    But if you are not trained with this defensive, more specialized weapon you might more likely to end up to miss the enemy blade and/or ending up getting this special weapon knocked out of your hand, especially when your off-hand is usually weaker then your main weapon hand.

    In other words, I think this weapon required more training from a person which already knew issues with blade fighting and involved ankles of incoming blows how to use it more effectively in a split second to grab or 'just' deflect a incoming blow. That's why shields were much more used by most fighters as they tend to be larger and are less easily to loose by the impact of an enemy weapon. I think this could explain why those were less common as I would expect a user should have some minimum of knowledge of sword play and the involved forces of incoming blows depending on ankles.

  43. Perhaps "breaker" wasn't meant to describe what the weapon does literally, but rather, to describe the fact that it rendered the enemy's sword useless, as if it had been broken. One also thinks of swordfighting terms like "to break the guard"; perhaps there is a relation there, between the verb "break" in both cases. Binding blade certainly breaks the enemy's guard.

  44. Pretty sure the term sword breaker is figurative and it does seem like a status item. A shield and sword would maybe considered better.

  45. I used a version of one of these for 15+ years, albeit without the arrow pointed shaped teeth. The problem is pretty much what you described. The blade has to be fairly accurately aligned to go in, and it certainly does not go in every time. In a fast combat, by the time you know it's gone in, it's normally too late to react, before the opponent naturally pulls their blade back. However, if you assume it's going to go in and you just automatically do a twist/pull, if it hasn't gone in, your arm/hand/wrist and parrying blade are now in a sub optimal position to deal with the next attack from your opponent. I'd normally use it in a fight because it looked scary/impressive, but actually just turn it round and parry with the flat stronger side for the majority of the combat.

  46. You should make an sword that has thos Sword manipulating teeth on the top edge it would be so much more useful. And make them dimand tip and give the sword a heavy hilt to give you the moment to actually break a swords mans rist

  47. I'm thinking that it places too much emphasis on blocking a very fast moving sword with a dagger. Also, as it binds the sword/your enemy it also to a lesser extent binds the dagger/you.

  48. if ur stabbing, they will get caught on bones…rib bones and get stuck temporarily or permanently and those seconds could decide everything

  49. if you broke a sword with that knife the sword could still be used to stab with so that knife would not be so great after all my thought

  50. I think the rarity is a direct reflection of the high cost in wealth and mastery. Not every smith would be capable of making an effective dagger. Of those that could, the time to create would be longer versus another weapon or shield. in addition, it would take more practice or experience to use effectively than a buckler, shield, or other weapon. The average consumer (which would already be a low percentage of the population) would likely opt for one of the other options. The rarity does not equate to ineffectiveness.

  51. Maybe it was a secondary weapon, meaning the person would have had a sword as well and used that as a backup/extra tool for defence ??

  52. I would suspect that one of the largest problems with this weapon was the extra work it required to make compared to a regular parrying or even a tripple dagger, which also is intended for binding blades. Bladesmiths could charge a lot of money for their time, making this weapon much more expensive. It also likely required special training to use correctly so that you didn't fail to bind and leave yourself open.

  53. I like how everyone is talking about the cost of that blade etc , yeah sure it was probably expensive, but what about the craftsmanship needed to be able to make a blade as such?! there sure werent bladesmiths out there left and right, that could make a sword breaker. Maybe 1 in 100 and thats probably a generous guess.

  54. I'm not sure about this, I thought this came into the picture when most duels were fought with thrusting swords and if I had to defend against thrusts I wouldn't want a dagger

  55. To the fencing, there are several things you've done very wrong! If you want to get a understanding of that weapon you have to use it under the right conditions. This weapon is designed as a secondary weapon in duel combat, no battle ground and too expensive for a day to day fight in the taverns. To get the core sense of a weapon you have to put it in the right context, just draw a picture evaluating a flamethrower under water >: )

    – 1th. both fencers have to have a Rapier for their body size! This will lead you to the correct range and distance the two opponents would take for a fight.
    – 2nd Rapiers are used similar to modern sport fencing, the right food and arm are leading – you only change this position when you have a binding of the right hand weapon of your opponent with your right hand blade or escape from the contact range sidewards.
    – 3nd, the fancing daggers are a supporting tools for the defence. Let me explain this, the history of those tools is a straight line form the dark age Buckler – a Hand Shield to mostly protect the Hand and lower right hand arm in duel combat. With the evolution of the Handguard on the right hand weapon Bucklers became more and more weapons and switched later on to daggers up to left hand swords. But as you can find in many fencing books of that time, the usage was quite similar and the reason is stupidly simple. Have a look at 4:15 the rapier tip is far behind the "dead zone"; the blade would stick out of the defender, when stepped through him ( the historical definition of useless overkill 🙂 ). The defender on the other hand is not able to scratch the clothing of the attacker with his blade, even though the Attackers range is stupidly close for that rapier. Now, as the Attacker, why in the seven hells would you smash your main weapon in the only "danger zone" the opponent has to offer, if he left open the entire left side of his body? No way a fencer is doing so, he's attacking weak points, the knee, ankle, food, face, kidneys, hip, anything, but not the dagger blade!
    – 4th, a slashing stroke with a rapier is quite uncommon, it's either a pushed stroke or a stap, a slash opens your body center and make the invention of the hand guard quiet ineffective (the ability to attack and defend in the same movement).

    So how to use the side arm properly? First you fight with the main weapon, so you attack and block – with the main weapon and now it depends on your fancing philosophy, your strategy and your opportunities. But in the most cases you'll try to bind the opponent's blade in the strength ( lower 1/3 hilt side of your blade ), with your tip towards the opponents body center and opponents tip not pointing at you at all 🙂
    Now here comes the 2nd. weapon in place, you have now time to get the main weapon of your opponent under "control" by simply keep the blade binding to the 2nd weapon, so your main weapon becomes free again for the final struck. While the opponent is busy with his 2nd. weapon to get rid of your blade within his face 🙂

    So what is this sword breaker for? It's a oversofisticaded side arm to break the DEFENCE ability of the opponent's main arm. In plain german fencing language it's still "Die verteidigung (durch)brechen" aka. "to break the defence".
    Why it was not successful:
    The leak of simplicity – to bind a blade a normal blade or rod is more than useful and on the down side the sword breaker is drawing attention away from your right handed main weapon with a winning choice.
    2nd. down side price, this tool requires a high craftsman skill to make, compared to a normal mass produced guarded fancing dagger of that time. E.g. some german fencing books of that time tend to advice walking stick, brooms, or a wrapped jacket around the left arm over a dagger, simply because of pricing vs. effectivity.
    What did make it valuable, the little chance to have the advantage on your side, against high skilled opponents in duel combat. It's a feature comparable to modern high-performance sport, the football shoe with 2 gramm less weight or so 🙂

    Let me close this argument by giving you the kill range of a rapier vs. rapier fighting ground – a rapier blade length is measured from ground up to the belly button and the cross guard has to be slight above. For me, I'm 1,75m it's about 1 meter blade length. So my kill zone starts at my height divided by 2 plus let's say 90cm giving us 10cm, to do the job (in the most chases, only the first 20cm of the blade are razor sharp anyways). This make my range about ~1,7.. Meter that is roughly my height in total with killing +10cm steel … and the opponent will/would try to catch that stupidly bone chattering fast blade with a 30 cm dagger bade, unable to defend anything below the knee .. think again about your choice for the defence weapon 🙂

  56. I see three major factors that likely prevented the sword breaker from seeing widespread use
    -Those look very time intensive to make compared to anything else at the time. I don't doubt that they were insanely expensive to purchase or commission.
    -As you mentioned, if you try to trap a blade that you don't have a full grip on, you leave yourself wide open.
    -It likely took someone who was very skilled to be able to use it to its full potential because you would need to quickly discern if you've trapped their blade or not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *