PDA

View Full Version : Kukri improbability



Darth Stabber
2010-07-20, 12:14 AM
Why, oh why, Does every book that includes a picture of someone wielding one does the idiot wield a kukri over handed. The weapon is wielded with the blade down from the fist IRL. It is designed to slash upwardly and disembowel the target. Is this a case of me being too picky or does anyone else with real world knowledge of blades see this as a gross mistreatment of a weapon. I really hate to be a nitpicker, but this seriously bugs me since it is one of the few phb weapons still in use by a modern military force (the Gurkha Corps of the British).

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 12:16 AM
I think I'm bothered more by weapon weights actually. That aside, since most people that are drawn with a kukri are from the wrong nationality, one would assume someone taught them how to wield it incorrectly. :smalltongue:

Temotei
2010-07-20, 12:18 AM
Couldn't you use it in a downward slashing movement for almost the same, if not the same, effect?

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 12:19 AM
It doesn't bug me, because kukris aren't used that way. Or at least not often, because it isn't optimal.

The kukri is designed to be a blade-heavy weapon, benefiting from momentum to hack at the enemy. Holding it (or really any slashing or hacking weapon) underhanded lessens the reach considerably. And when you're in a knife fight, every inch counts.

I own one, and use it when camping as a light -hatchet- because of the balance characteristics.

Where did you learn that the kukri was used underhand?

Darth Stabber
2010-07-20, 12:22 AM
From the History Channel show Mail Call. Staring the drill sergeant guy from Full Metal Jacket. It is a somewhat reliable source.

Feichi
2010-07-20, 12:22 AM
In defense of the original post, regarding why the slashing motion would be different if done overhanded and from above...

's kinda' hard to disembowel a shoulder.

Temotei
2010-07-20, 12:24 AM
's kinda' hard to disembowel a shoulder.

No bowels? :smallamused:

gallagher
2010-07-20, 12:30 AM
It doesn't bug me, because kukris aren't used that way. Or at least not often, because it isn't optimal.

The kukri is designed to be a blade-heavy weapon, benefiting from momentum to hack at the enemy. Holding it (or really any slashing or hacking weapon) underhanded lessens the reach considerably. And when you're in a knife fight, every inch counts.

I own one, and use it when camping as a light -hatchet- because of the balance characteristics.

Where did you learn that the kukri was used underhand?
while it isnt incorrect to use the kukri overhanded, the idea for the Gurkha was that they would draw people in close and then use superior tactics with surprising mastery and quickness to eliminate people quickly.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 12:30 AM
If you really want to disembowel someone, you use an overhand grip and stab.

Stabbing is more likely to hit vital organs anyways, and the angle of the blade on a kukri actually makes it very effective at stabbing. Stabbing also provides several inches of reach more than an underhanded upwards slash.

Granted, I can see how an underhanded, upward slash -could- work, but it's not optimal, and there's really nothing it does that an overhand stab couldn't do better (except perhaps a surprise strike when your enemy doesn't know you have the kukri...)

EDIT: Got ninja'd. As the poster above me states, I could see it working if you get drawn into very close grappling, or as a surprise move, but I stand by the standard use of such a weapon.

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 12:31 AM
So.... who's going to tell these guys (http://torabladesforum.co.uk/uploads/145/Gurkha-Training-November-2004-002.jpg) that they're doing it wrong?

Darth Stabber
2010-07-20, 12:33 AM
There is a fundamental difference between how a weapon is presented in an inspection vs how it is utilized in combat.

Source: being Ex-military.

balistafreak
2010-07-20, 12:35 AM
So.... who's going to tell these guys (http://torabladesforum.co.uk/uploads/145/Gurkha-Training-November-2004-002.jpg) that they're doing it wrong?

Pah, they're clearly at some sort of attention, which throws all the rules out of the window.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 12:35 AM
There is a fundamental difference between how a weapon is presented in an inspection vs how it is utilized in combat.

Source: being Ex-military.

To clarify your context, that statement about the inspection presentation is from being ex-mil, or you say you know how to use a kukri from being ex-mil?

Temotei
2010-07-20, 12:36 AM
To clarify your context, that statement about the inspection presentation is from being ex-mil, or you say you know how to use a kukri from being ex-mil?

I'm guessing the former.

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 12:36 AM
If you really want to disembowel someone, you use an overhand grip and stab.

Stabbing is more likely to hit vital organs anyways, and the angle of the blade on a kukri actually makes it very effective at stabbing. Stabbing also provides several inches of reach more than an underhanded upwards slash.

Granted, I can see how an underhanded, upward slash -could- work, but it's not optimal, and there's really nothing it does that an overhand stab couldn't do better (except perhaps a surprise strike when your enemy doesn't know you have the kukri...)

Overhand attacks are a bit easier to avoid from what I've seen. That or block. While a thrusting stab is also considered effective with the weapon, the benefits of slashing while in a mass combat are that you are less likely to lose the weapon. My guess is the weapon and techniques are designed to cause a quick debillitating strike in an extremely agressive manner, while maintaining the ability to continue advancing, or to hit another enemy.

Darth Stabber
2010-07-20, 12:39 AM
Overhand attacks are a bit easier to avoid from what I've seen. That or block. While a thrusting stab is also considered effective with the weapon, the benefits of slashing while in a mass combat are that you are less likely to lose the weapon. My guess is the weapon and techniques are designed to cause a quick debillitating strike in an extremely agressive manner, while maintaining the ability to continue advancing, or to hit another enemy.

Bingo, that hits on the crux of what I am asking. As far as my ex-mil status, that is just to explain that weapons being presented for inspection is not the same as them being held for combative purposes.

Thiyr
2010-07-20, 12:40 AM
This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPD9LxbgLxU&feature=related) seems to be a better way of showing that it is used for overhanded chopping than the previous picture.

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 12:40 AM
There is a fundamental difference between how a weapon is presented in an inspection vs how it is utilized in combat.

Source: being Ex-military.
Alright, then tell this guy (http://www.himalayan-imports.com/gorkha2-kukri%20&%20assault%20rifle[afghan2001].jpg) and these guys (http://www.gurkhakukris.com/Themes/categories/4916.jpg). Also these guys (http://www.army.mod.uk/images/images-microsites/HQInfantry/INF_RGR_kukri200.jpg). And especially these guys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPD9LxbgLxU).


(edit) Oh, and just for fun, these guys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njFeTJcg9bg).

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 12:41 AM
Overhand attacks are a bit easier to avoid from what I've seen. That or block. While a thrusting stab is also considered effective with the weapon, the benefits of slashing while in a mass combat are that you are less likely to lose the weapon. My guess is the weapon and techniques are designed to cause a quick debillitating strike in an extremely agressive manner, while maintaining the ability to continue advancing, or to hit another enemy.

Overhand attacks can come in from far more angles than an underhand attack.

Try this experiment: take a rule, hold it overhand. See how many angles you can comfortably swing from. Now switch to underhand and do it again. I think you'll find that any underhanded swings that try to come from any angle but the bottom 180 degrees will feel stunted and awkward.

Also, an experiment I just did myself, using an eight inch kitchen knife, is that a slash against a particular target (in this case, a cardboard box) from an underhand position comes up between 2-4 inches short, from a position of footing where an overhand slash would strike the target cleanly.

EDIT: Also, stabbing and losing the weapon is a concern in mass combat, but knives of all sorts are not generally used in mass combat anymore. In a single combat, a thrust will end the fight, and any concerns of the knife being caught in the remains become purely academic.

Ponderthought
2010-07-20, 12:42 AM
To tell the truth, there is rarely a "right" way to wield any weapon, while there are many wrong ways. Given the weight and balance of the one I have right here, it seems more intuitive to wield in a chopping manner, or in a sort of indirect chopping stab, building up considerable force on a downward swing, with the slightly bent angle of the blade still allowing a penetrating motion. They havent been referred to as "breast bone splitters" for nothing.

Dilb
2010-07-20, 12:51 AM
From the History Channel show Mail Call. Staring the drill sergeant guy from Full Metal Jacket. It is a somewhat reliable source.

The clip in question (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQjxHOWf5uU). He's holding it overhanded, just rotating the wrist for a low slash. The Nepalese guys are holding it overhand too.

Keld Denar
2010-07-20, 01:00 AM
I have one too that my grandfather got in WWII (he flew cargo planes between India and Burma) from trading with a Gurka soldier. Really neat thing. I can also see it being used in a fasion more similar to a hatchet or tomahawk than any other knife just given the weighting. Granted, mine isn't a mastercraft weapon by any respects, but it does appear to have seen actual wear. Whether that was combat or chopping through brush or splitting firewood, I can't tell, but its definitely "well loved".

I always kinda envisioned it as pretty much the perfect weapon for cutting the throat of an unsuspecting advesary. Gurka's were WELL known for their ninja-like sneaking abilities and gurgling for help isn't nearly as effective as screaming.

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 01:01 AM
In general, you get far more power, control, and distance with an overhand grip than with an underhand grip. There's a reason it's default. Underhand is harder to block with a sword or similar weapon, better for getting around shields and other obstacles, and can occasionally throw off enemies who are too used to overhand, but you really do lose a lot of power and distance and that can be fatal against an armed opponent.

Anyway, the kukri gets a lot of myths around it (I've heard "perfectly weighted to slit the human throat" before), but really it's just a terrifyingly effective hatchet. It doesn't slice so much as chop, with the curve amplifying the sharpness of the blade and the forward weighting giving it added force, just like an axe. Actually holding a good one should make that immediately obvious to most people - this is a knife that wants to chop. And it's damn good at it.

And you can't chop underhanded.

Darth Stabber
2010-07-20, 01:08 AM
And you can't chop underhanded.

But you sure can disembowel.

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 01:11 AM
But you sure can disembowel.
Again, tell that to the Gurkhas. It's their weapon. Tell me when you find a video of some Gurkhas using it underhanded. I'll wait.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 01:12 AM
But you sure can disembowel.

But you can do it better overhanded, and you can do everything else overhanded. Underhanded allows very few shots but that one surprise gut strike.

About it being hatchetlike, I always thought it should have been 1d4 20/x3 rather than 18-20/x2, due to the weighting. Use a jambiya, or other scimitar-like dagger for the 18-20, for consistency.

Darth Stabber
2010-07-20, 01:14 AM
About it being hatchetlike, I always thought it should have been 1d4 20/x3 rather than 18-20/x2, due to the weighting. Use a jambiya, or other scimitar-like dagger for the 18-20, for consistency.

Honestly, I don't think there are enough good crit ranged weapons around, which makes me apprehensive to turn off one of the martial ones.

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 01:17 AM
But you can do it better overhanded, and you can do everything else overhanded. Underhanded allows very few shots but that one surprise gut strike.

About it being hatchetlike, I always thought it should have been 1d4 20/x3 rather than 18-20/x2, due to the weighting. Use a jambiya, or other scimitar-like dagger for the 18-20, for consistency.
Curved blades always got extra crit range though. Since curves amplify sharpness, it makes sense for it to follow the same pattern. The weighting is hatchet-like, but the cut is scimitar-like, so I think a scimitar-like crit works.

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 01:20 AM
Overhand attacks can come in from far more angles than an underhand attack.

Try this experiment: take a rule, hold it overhand. See how many angles you can comfortably swing from. Now switch to underhand and do it again. I think you'll find that any underhanded swings that try to come from any angle but the bottom 180 degrees will feel stunted and awkward.

That's fair enough, but take an M16 and lay it flat over top a helmet and see how many of those angles get past it, and how many of those angles are easily detected. More options on the angle don't really translate to different opportunities.


Also, an experiment I just did myself, using an eight inch kitchen knife, is that a slash against a particular target (in this case, a cardboard box) from an underhand position comes up between 2-4 inches short, from a position of footing where an overhand slash would strike the target cleanly.

That is certainly a trade off, however, I don't want to be at arms length when my opponent is wielding a bayonetted rifle, which was when they were predominantly in use.


EDIT: Also, stabbing and losing the weapon is a concern in mass combat, but knives of all sorts are not generally used in mass combat anymore. In a single combat, a thrust will end the fight, and any concerns of the knife being caught in the remains become purely academic.

Keep in mind that the techniques and weapon were designed somewhat before the modern day. Currently, since knives aren't the mainstay weapon, or even a commonly used weapon, it's likely that kukuri will mostly be maintained ceremonially, rather than functionally regardless.

Keld Denar
2010-07-20, 01:24 AM
If I ever found myself duel wielding kukiri's IRL, I'd probably actually hold my right-hand one overhanded (I'm right handed) and my left hand one underhanded. The forward hand would be used for striking and threatening, with the underhanded one used for forearm blocks and spinning underhanded slashes.

Thats just the feel I get from holding the weapon. I'm not a Gurka, nor a trained fighter in ANY type of combat other than D&D, which doesn't really count.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 01:25 AM
That's fair enough, but take an M16 and lay it flat over top a helmet and see how many of those angles get past it, and how many of those angles are easily detected. More options on the angle don't really translate to different opportunities.
This I'm actually confused by... putting an M16 atop a helmet?


That is certainly a trade off, however, I don't want to be at arms length when my opponent is wielding a bayonetted rifle, which was when they were predominantly in use.
If you don't want to be at arms length, why would you want to use a grip that shortens your reach? Recall here that the OP was about using it underhand, and I'm talking about using it overhand, thus allowing you to be that much farther away.



Keep in mind that the techniques and weapon were designed somewhat before the modern day. Currently, since knives aren't the mainstay weapon, or even a commonly used weapon, it's likely that kukuri will mostly be maintained ceremonially, rather than functionally regardless.
Almost nothing brought into combat by any modern unit is merely ceremonial. Bayonets have gone from a necessity in infantry combat to a utility knife, but they're still functional, and the same goes for the kukri.

JaronK
2010-07-20, 01:30 AM
Having used Kukris, I always was taught to use them overhanded, even though I know how to use weapons of that type underhanded. So I think overhanded is in fact the default.

The one that gets me is Swashbucklers not being proficient with bucklers. Do people not know where the name comes from?

JaronK

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 01:31 AM
Having used Kukris, I always was taught to use them overhanded, even though I know how to use weapons of that type underhanded. So I think overhanded is in fact the default.

The one that gets me is Swashbucklers not being proficient with bucklers. Do people not know where the name comes from?

JaronK

Worse is that bucklers are assumed to be wrist-strap shields.

Vitruviansquid
2010-07-20, 01:37 AM
I thought the term "Swashbucklers" continued to be in use to describe swordsmen after bucklers fell out of fashion.

In any case, the word "Blackguard" is also often abused in fantasy writing.

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 01:40 AM
If you don't want to be at arms length, why would you want to use a grip that shortens your reach? Recall here that the OP was about using it underhand, and I'm talking about using it overhand, thus allowing you to be that much farther away.
I think he's suggesting you might want to be in closer. And I agree that if someone has a bayonette and I have a knife, I want to be as close as humanly possible because that bayonette is going to be nigh-useless once I'm closer in that the tip.

However, the kukris were not originally intended to fight bayonettes, and combat forms using them would likely tend to assume combat against other short blades or unarmed opponents, with only a bit of more specific training against longer weapons like that. Also, since they're pretty darn lethal weapons if you can get one good chop in, even through body armor, I would expect that they'd still be going for that against a bayonette type weapon in the real world. You have to break range either way, and an overhand chop is going to do far better against body armor than an underhand slice.

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 01:41 AM
This I'm actually confused by... putting an M16 atop a helmet?

Because I don't think you could get a freind to hold a rifle over his head to block it while you hack at him with a knife. Overhand swings were fairly easy to instinctively block, while an underhanded swing was a bit harder to see coming, and is less easy to block in my opinion.


If you don't want to be at arms length, why would you want to use a grip that shortens your reach? Recall here that the OP was about using it underhand, and I'm talking about using it overhand, thus allowing you to be that much farther away.

There are three ranges against pole arms. Way out of reach, in reach, or too close. Knives of any sort had too be too close to survive in a protracted fight against a man with a musket and bayonette. You could hold a sword overhand, and still be in that middle kill zone.


Almost nothing brought into combat by any modern unit is merely ceremonial. Bayonets have gone from a necessity in infantry combat to a utility knife, but they're still functional, and the same goes for the kukri.

I'n not sure in this case. Bayonets and standard knives are a bit more useful as tools, and I can easily imagine the kukri being replaced if it weren't for the sentimental value. Certainly seeing less relevance in combat itself however.


However, the kukris were not originally intended to fight bayonettes, and combat forms using them would likely tend to assume combat against other short blades or unarmed opponents, with only a bit of more specific training against longer weapons like that. Also, since they're pretty darn lethal weapons if you can get one good chop in, even through body armor, I would expect that they'd still be going for that against a bayonette type weapon in the real world. You have to break range either way, and an overhand chop is going to do far better against body armor than an underhand slice.

I'm not certain if you'd see much armour back then around Nepal. And don't forget, this downward hack is precisely the sort of attack military training camps in the era tried to move people away from. It leaves you open, targets the best armour a warrior wears (helmet, gorget, pauldrons) and is far more choreographed than an attack coming from closer to your center of mass, be it a stab or a swipe.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 01:48 AM
An overhand side chop has far more force behind it than an underhand side chop.

Try it sometime.

Keld Denar
2010-07-20, 01:51 AM
Because I don't think you could get a freind to hold a rifle over his head to block it while you hack at him with a knife.

I think the point there was that if you balanced an M16 on top of a helmet, you could concievably fire it in 360 degrees around you. Now, of those 360 degrees, only 1-2 of them are gonna hit whatever your are trying to hit. Just because you have 360 degrees of options, doesn't mean all of those options are gonna lead to a kill. I think that was the analogy he was trying to draw. Just because you can overhand chop 16 different ways from 32 different angles doesn't mean you'll score a kill on even most of them. The underhand cut, being a bit more sudden and from a hard to block angle only has a couple of attack options, but all of them are VERY effective.

At least thats how I interpretted that statement. I'm rather disinclined to agree, considering a person coule probably get in 2 swings at your head while you are trying to close the gap between you to execute an underhand cut. While I'd rather not see my intestines on the ground under any circumstances, I'd put money on the fact that the 2 overhand chops would have a better chance of striking a debilitationing blow than a single underhanded cut. Just as in D&D, reach is important in combat. If I can cut you down before you can reach me, you can't hurt me!

Thiyr
2010-07-20, 01:56 AM
I'n not sure in this case. Bayonets and standard knives are a bit more useful as tools, and I can easily imagine the kukri being replaced if it weren't for the sentimental value. Certainly seeing less relevance in combat itself however.

Strangely, this is the point I'm shakiest on. What is it that a standard knife could do that this couldn't? I'm honestly curious on your thoughts here.

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 01:57 AM
I think the point there was that if you balanced an M16 on top of a helmet, you could concievably fire it in 360 degrees around you. Now, of those 360 degrees, only 1-2 of them are gonna hit whatever your are trying to hit. Just because you have 360 degrees of options, doesn't mean all of those options are gonna lead to a kill. I think that was the analogy he was trying to draw. Just because you can overhand chop 16 different ways from 32 different angles doesn't mean you'll score a kill on even most of them. The underhand cut, being a bit more sudden and from a hard to block angle only has a couple of attack options, but all of them are VERY effective.

Wut? No, I literally mean people would use their rifle raised above their head to block melee attacks when kukuris were in popular use. Any angle of downward chop will be intercepted by the rifle in this manner. As well, the bayonetted rifle attacked relatively low, either thrust towards your face or your chest, which is easier to block with a low blade, rather than running in with it above your head.


An overhand side chop has far more force behind it than an underhand side chop.

Try it sometime.

You don't necessarily need nor want more force behind a blow when using a slashing weapon.

Seriously, a kukuri isn't going to go through 1500s helmets or armour with an easy chop. If the other guy has armour, you want to use a different weapon, or try a thrust after you've got him down already. If they don't have armour, a draw cut is just as effective at putting them down as a much harder chop.


Strangely, this is the point I'm shakiest on. What is it that a standard knife could do that this couldn't? I'm honestly curious on your thoughts here.

At least for me, I find it's way harder to open cans with it. I usually put the tip of the knife to the lid, then use a rock to puncture the can. A bent kukuri with a broader tip is a bit more awkward for this. Most other functions like cutting ropes, or prepping meat were the same, but opening cans is important.

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 02:01 AM
I'm not certain if you'd see much armour back then around Nepal. And don't forget, this downward hack is precisely the sort of attack military training camps in the era tried to move people away from. It leaves you open, targets the best armour a warrior wears (helmet, gorget, pauldrons) and is far more choreographed than an attack coming from closer to your center of mass, be it a stab or a swipe.
You may not see much armor... but the point is, if you can reliably kill or incapacitate with one attack, it doesn't matter so much anymore. Someone going in for the disembowling has to pass through the range of the chopping, and if both are lethal then I frankly would rather go for the chop. Especially since a disembowling is actually a pretty slow way to kill a fellow. You haven't hit anything that'll actually prevent him from killing you back while he bleeds to death or gets poisoned by his own effluence, and even if he's unlikely to recover, it's moot if he can take you down too. You really have to pray he slips right into shock. Disembowlings are classy, but slow and messy and honestly should never be an assassin's first choice.

You're right about heavy medival armor, but we're back to something the historical gurkhas didn't often face and the modern ones don't care so much about either.

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 02:09 AM
You aren't going to get two swings in from the point of a hack to the point of a slash though. It will still basically be 1 from either. I'm still stating my point supposing the kukuri is the shorter weapon by a fair degree, which I think is a fair assumption, and if that is the case, you won't be killed by another individual as you disembowel them if you can, simply because you're too close for them to do so. They would certainly be able to do so if they also carried a short knife however, though in that case I'd probably prefer a thrust over either a hack or slash.

Even assuming you don't use a backhand grip, I'm not sure I'd use an overhand swing as the primary for that thing.

Aroka
2010-07-20, 02:09 AM
Wouldn't a swing with an underhand grip be easier to defend against even unarmed, too? If you chop or swing with an overhand grip, the blade is in front, making going for your forearm a riskier proposition; if you're holding the blade underhand, the blade is following behind your hand and forearm, which seems to make blocking or catching the arm somewhat safer?

Also, people I've seen handle knives practicedly can switch between underhand and overhand in basically no time. (edit) So even if a specific kind of swing is made with an underhand grip, wouldn't it only ever be used for that swing? (/edit) Generally, underhand grip mostly seems useful for hiding the knife behind your arm (and it is scarily easy to hide a knife that way).

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 02:16 AM
I'm not sure. I know agressive movement can block an overhand swing unarmed, and virtually any armed person could block an overhand swing. They may be leading blade first, but you can still safely grab along their elbow and entire fore-arm as well as their hand. To compare, trying to grab a reverse grip, you may be able to catch it from further away from the blade, but the only really safe place to grab is the hand, which is a bit harder.

Frankly if they have a kukuri and you're unarmed, you're probably screwed anyway though.

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 02:17 AM
Wut? No, I literally mean people would use their rifle raised above their head to block melee attacks when kukuris were in popular use. Any angle of downward chop will be intercepted by the rifle in this manner. As well, the bayonetted rifle attacked relatively low, either thrust towards your face or your chest, which is easier to block with a low blade, rather than running in with it above your head.
Overhand != over-head. A knife held overhand can strike effectively in something close to a 180 degree arc, including straight from the left or right, without too much loss of force. Raising the rifle over your head would leave you ridiculously wide open, especially since a smaller knife like a kukri moves far faster than a heavy stick like a bayonetted rifle, and can easily change targets to avoid a block like that.

And on defence, I've always found blocking underhanded to be ridiculously difficult and far less effective than blocking overhanded. Even in the situation you describe, I'd feel more comfortable trying to block overhanded. Maybe with years of practice that could change, but it's not so simple as you seem to be implying. Holding it underhanded robs you of a whole lot of your force, and a bayonette is likely to have a lot of power coming behind it, so successfully deflecting it underhanded is harder than it sounds. It's probably easier just to try and sidestep.



You don't necessarily need nor want more force behind a blow when using a slashing weapon.

Seriously, a kukuri isn't going to go through 1500s helmets or armour with an easy chop. If the other guy has armour, you want to use a different weapon, or try a thrust after you've got him down already. If they don't have armour, a draw cut is just as effective at putting them down as a much harder chop.
In my experience, most modern knife trainers will tell you to expect several wounds in any given knife-fight, even if you're good. The most common cuts are to the chest, back, and arms - and all of those will bleed badly and damage muscles underneath, but you really can't guarantee putting someone out of a fight that way unless you know exactly where to cut, and can hit those targets in the middle of combat against someone who's not going to stand still and take it. Where you want force is if you're going, not for surface damage, but to actually cut down to and even through the bone. A normal knife wound on an arm is manageable, but a lost arm not so much. Force is definitely a plus, if you want anything more than a shallow slice. Of course, that doesn't mean trying to muscle it, a good cut is more about focus and control, but even that's easier overhanded.



At least for me, I find it's way harder to open cans with it. I usually put the tip of the knife to the lid, then use a rock to puncture the can. A bent kukuri with a broader tip is a bit more awkward for this. Most other functions like cutting ropes, or prepping meat were the same, but opening cans is important.
Opening cans, I'll grant.

JaronK
2010-07-20, 02:17 AM
I think he's suggesting you might want to be in closer. And I agree that if someone has a bayonette and I have a knife, I want to be as close as humanly possible because that bayonette is going to be nigh-useless once I'm closer in that the tip.

This is entirely false. If you're going knife against bayonette, you're basically screwed unless you get lucky. You start to go past that tip and the butt of the rifle is hitting you in the head. I actually specialize in pole arms (and twin light weapons like machetes) and what you just said is actually the stock standard mistake people make when dealing with that type of weapon... they think they can hit it out of the way and charge in safely. Usually, a quick twirl of the end of the weapon around their attack plants the point straight in their belly, and even if it doesn't I can just smack them with the other end of the weapon. Yes, it's not sharp... but it's equivalent to being hit in the head with a baseball bat. Gameover.

Either way though overhand gives better range, which is really what you need. I only use underhand when I'm going for style points or trying to confuse an opponent.

JaronK

Superglucose
2010-07-20, 02:18 AM
If I ever found myself duel wielding kukiri's IRL, I'd probably actually hold my right-hand one overhanded (I'm right handed) and my left hand one underhanded. The forward hand would be used for striking and threatening, with the underhanded one used for forearm blocks and spinning underhanded slashes.
If I found myself duel wielding kukri's IRL I'd probably actually drop both of them, cast Polymorph, and eat my opponent as a 7-headed hydra.

... what? :smalltongue:

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 02:19 AM
I'm more arguing against an overhand swing than I'm arguing for the backhand swipe. Might be the preference for the gladius legion style warfare, or even the bayonete, but I just don't find swings all that effective.


Raising the rifle over your head would leave you ridiculously wide open, especially since a smaller knife like a kukri moves far faster than a heavy stick like a bayonetted rifle, and can easily change targets to avoid a block like that.

It seems to be in several prints of the era, though admittedly, they deal with blocking larger weapons like other muskets, or heavy cavalry sabers.


In my experience, most modern knife trainers will tell you to expect several wounds in any given knife-fight, even if you're good. The most common cuts are to the chest, back, and arms - and all of those will bleed badly and damage muscles underneath, but you really can't guarantee putting someone out of a fight that way unless you know exactly where to cut, and can hit those targets in the middle of combat against someone who's not going to stand still and take it. Where you want force is if you're going, not for surface damage, but to actually cut down to and even through the bone. A normal knife wound on an arm is manageable, but a lost arm not so much. Force is definitely a plus, if you want anything more than a shallow slice. Of course, that doesn't mean trying to muscle it, a good cut is more about focus and control, but even that's easier overhanded.

An open battle engagement is very different from the martial artsy style knife fights. You are stuck in a line with little room to move left or right or front and back, and if you try to focus on one opponent, or get distracted by a nick that you could normally move away from and recover your senses, you're very likely going to get killed by someone else.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 02:26 AM
So, you don't like the overhand swing, but you're not arguing for the underhand swipe.

Unless you're petitioning for the stab, I think you've just come up with a whole new way to use the kukri.

Aroka
2010-07-20, 02:28 AM
So, you don't like the overhand swing, but you're not arguing for the underhand swipe.

Unless you're petitioning for the stab, I think you've just come up with a whole new way to use the kukri.

He did say (a few times I think) he prefers thrusts.


I'd probably prefer a thrust over either a hack or slash.

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 02:30 AM
This is entirely false. If you're going knife against bayonette, you're basically screwed unless you get lucky. You start to go past that tip and the butt of the rifle is hitting you in the head. I actually specialize in pole arms (and twin light weapons like machetes) and what you just said is actually the stock standard mistake people make when dealing with that type of weapon... they think they can hit it out of the way and charge in safely. Usually, a quick twirl of the end of the weapon around their attack plants the point straight in their belly, and even if it doesn't I can just smack them with the other end of the weapon. Yes, it's not sharp... but it's equivalent to being hit in the head with a baseball bat. Gameover.

Either way though overhand gives better range, which is really what you need. I only use underhand when I'm going for style points or trying to confuse an opponent.

JaronK
Well, agreed that it's not that simple. However, outside the tip = screwed, and I've seen some pretty nasty beatdowns happen when the person with the smaller weapon could basically trap the larger weapon in the space between the two of them. If you can't move the polearm around to swing, you're in serious trouble and are almost better off just dropping it and trying to grapple. I fight with polearm a lot myself (I'm training in formal Naginata, as well doing informal LARP boffer fighting), and what I've found is I have far more luck simply keeping the tip between me and the enemy in the first place, rather than trying to clock them after they get in close. I'm not helpless when they close, but the whole advantage with a polearm is the distance, and taking that away from me is a very good approach.

Of course, in both LARP and Naginata, someone can afford to take a solid hit or two trying to close, and in both there is a big difference between "practical strikes" and "legal strikes" so some of what you said may not apply, but I stand by my point - any time you're fighting someone with a longer weapon than you, you're going to start doing proportionately a lot better close. Small weapons are almost invariably more agile in tight spaces than large weapons, and getting right in nice and snug with the enemy is a great way of manufacturing tight spaces.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 02:30 AM
He did say (a few times I think) he prefers thrusts.

Then we don't really need to be having this debate, since I brought up the thrust as well as the overhand shot in my original post.

Unless he's so dead set against using the weapon in an overhand slash that he'd like to continue to try convincing me not to use a hatchet-like knive to sever an enemy's subclavian artery.

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 02:30 AM
So, you don't like the overhand swing, but you're not arguing for the underhand swipe.

Unless you're petitioning for the stab, I think you've just come up with a whole new way to use the kukri.

Yes. Running in like a maniac and bludgeoning them to death with the handle. :smallbiggrin:

Stabs are usually the best way to use a weapon in an army context. The hackey slashy weapons worked well for people who wore a lot of armour, and who fought people who wore less armour, but all in all, I just can't say I think they were all that dominant.

Aroka
2010-07-20, 02:36 AM
...

I think JaronK's point was that the modern bayonetted rifle isn't really a polearm. It's a rifle with a bayonet. It's way shorter, and it has two ends to hit with (bayonet and butt). It seems much more capable of defence at even close range (though obviously not optimal), and swings with the butt can practically be made at clinching range (unless, of course, your opponent manages to trap or block the rifle entirely, which he'll probably be trying to do).

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 02:38 AM
An open battle engagement is very different from the martial artsy style knife fights. You are stuck in a line with little room to move left or right or front and back, and if you try to focus on one opponent, or get distracted by a nick that you could normally move away from and recover your senses, you're very likely going to get killed by someone else.
I actually wasn't talking about martial artsy style fights, I was talking about people who give training around down-and-dirty, here's-what-you-do-if-someone-tries-to-shiv-you-in-prison type stuff. The type that includes pictures of what sort of damage might actually happen (google "knife wound", no quotes, if you really want to know). I haven't been through any of these personally, so my knowledge is second-hand, but I've read some good reviews of the subject.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 02:38 AM
Yes. Running in like a maniac and bludgeoning them to death with the handle. :smallbiggrin:


Dude.

Don't underestimate the pommel.

I'm this close to ruling that anyone with Weapon Focus in almost any weapon can do between 1d4 and 1d6 bludgeoning damage with the pommel. It's so common in the old manuals.

Aroka
2010-07-20, 02:40 AM
Dude.

Don't underestimate the pommel.

I'm this close to ruling that anyone with Weapon Focus in almost any weapon can do between 1d4 and 1d6 bludgeoning damage with the pommel. It's so common in the old manuals.

In Conan d20, a pommel is a Light Martial Melee Weapon (since all swords are Martial or Exotic), 1d4/x2 damage. Very reasonable, and nice for grappling with a sword (which is what you did with longswords in armor; with the DR and Armor Piercing rules, grappling is even a good tactic against armored opponents in Conan d20)...

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 02:42 AM
I think JaronK's point was that the modern bayonetted rifle isn't really a polearm. It's a rifle with a bayonet. It's way shorter, and it has two ends to hit with (bayonet and butt). It seems much more capable of defence at even close range (though obviously not optimal), and swings with the butt can practically be made at clinching range (unless, of course, your opponent manages to trap or block the rifle entirely, which he'll probably be trying to do).
Even if attacks can be made at clinching range, I still say the smaller weapon almost invariably has the advantage there, whatever that is. If someone has a greatsword and I have a longsword, I'd try to get into that sort of distance. If someone has a longsword and I have a knife, same thing. Generally speaking the larger the weapon is, the more room it takes to swing it with any force, and thrusting is right out under a certain distance. The challenge is getting there, and a good opponent can make that a seriously lethal undertaking.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 02:48 AM
In Conan d20, a pommel is a Light Martial Melee Weapon (since all swords are Martial or Exotic), 1d4/x2 damage. Very reasonable, and nice for grappling with a sword (which is what you did with longswords in armor; with the DR and Armor Piercing rules, grappling is even a good tactic against armored opponents in Conan d20)...

Your ideas intrigue me, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

JaronK
2010-07-20, 02:50 AM
There's a huge difference between a longsword/greatsword and a bayonetted rifle... namely both ends of the rifle are supposed to be weapons. As such, it's shockingly fast when used correctly. You expect those bayonette attacks, but the butt attacks are deadly as well and combo perfectly off the bayonette (pulling back one hits with the other, for example). You actually get more force because of the push/pull motion used when attacking at close range, and the speed throws a lot of people off. This is VERY different from a weapon held at one end like a longsword (greatswords actually often had an unbladed part near the base of the blade, which was used to allow for pommel strikes. These work similarly).

The other important point, which only works in decent terrain, is that you can always just step back...

JaronK

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 02:54 AM
Longswords are also intended to be used as total weapons... More so than a rifle, I would even say. And the unbladed portion of a two-handed sword was called a ricasso, and was for improved control, not explicitly for pommeling... more often it would be used to turn the sword into an impromptu shortspear, especially when fighting heavily armored opponents (best way to get through the armor is stabs to the armpits, hands, eyes, groin, back of the knee, soles of the feet, etc... areas where chain and gambeson were the sole protection.)

JaronK
2010-07-20, 02:56 AM
This is true, but remember that the longsword was generally wielded from one end, and takes time to switch to the ricasso. That's time you usually don't have when your enemy has closed in so fast. But with a rifle, you're already in the right position.

And yeah, it was used for spearing as well, but that was also what made pommel strikes reasonable.

JaronK

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 02:57 AM
No shifting is required to club someone with the pommel of any sword.

Let's clarify terms, since D&D might be throwing some accidental jargon into the situation that clouds the waters.

When I say longsword, I mean a weapon of about 48 inches in length, designed to be used two-handed. D&D would call it a bastard sword. When used against unarmored opponents, it is used to hack, slash, and stab, occasionally going for the pommel shot when in a bind or grappling (happens often in the manuals). When used against armored opponents, it is used like a spear, holding the blade in one hand and the hilt in the other, and used to stab with the tip and club with the pommel and quillons, sometimes going for penetration, and othertime going to mangle articulation to prevent movement and allow for a clean kill (through the helmet or somesuch).

A D&D longsword is actually an arming sword, which you could also club someone with very easily without needing to shift your hand at all. It's just like a normal punch, with a tilt to the wrist bringing the pommel in first. Or a normal punch, hitting the enemy in the face with the quillon.

JaronK
2010-07-20, 02:59 AM
I'd say if you want to use it quickly and effectively, it's nearly a requirement. Trying to pommel strike from the grip doesn't make for a very effective attack. You end up exposing your wrists rather badly and it's a bit slower than I'd prefer for a close range situation. It's also very easy to get checked from that kind of attack.

JaronK

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 03:23 AM
I'd say if you want to use it quickly and effectively, it's nearly a requirement. Trying to pommel strike from the grip doesn't make for a very effective attack. You end up exposing your wrists rather badly and it's a bit slower than I'd prefer for a close range situation. It's also very easy to get checked from that kind of attack.

JaronK

I'm curious to know what gives you that impression... A pommel strike doesn't always have to be an 'ice-pick' downward motion. As stated, punching with the pommel is not only painful, but extremely fast. Sometimes faster in a close fight than a cut.

JaronK
2010-07-20, 03:34 AM
Just having actually used it and having had it used against me, I've always found pommel strikes easy to counter when they're used from the grip. The punch motion has very poor range and is slower than a normal punch (not much slower, but you can see the sword lining up for it), plus it pulls the sword out of position. Striking with the sword horizontal keeps the sword in a decent defensive position, but is extremely easy to see and block... or just aggressively out attack. The ice pick attacks are very easy to check as well by simply attacking the wrist (or grabbing it, or blocking it, whatever).

Meanwhile, a strike while holding a part of the weapon closer to the balance point is very hard to deal with, as it comes a lot faster and feels less predictable.

JaronK

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 03:39 AM
There's a huge difference between a longsword/greatsword and a bayonetted rifle... namely both ends of the rifle are supposed to be weapons. As such, it's shockingly fast when used correctly. You expect those bayonette attacks, but the butt attacks are deadly as well and combo perfectly off the bayonette (pulling back one hits with the other, for example). You actually get more force because of the push/pull motion used when attacking at close range, and the speed throws a lot of people off. This is VERY different from a weapon held at one end like a longsword (greatswords actually often had an unbladed part near the base of the blade, which was used to allow for pommel strikes. These work similarly).

The other important point, which only works in decent terrain, is that you can always just step back...

JaronK
To be fair, I've never trained against or with an actual bayonetted rifle, but I have fairly significant experience with a variety of staffs and polearms that work off a similar principal - blade on one end, with the other end fully intended to be used as a club. And in my experience you still need room to swing it effectively. A weapon held in the middle has a shorter max reach and a shorter min reach, but there's still a minimum. Not all that small, but enough that someone who's really determined to invade your personal space can rob you of it.

And yes, in my experience backpeddling combined with a good guard is generally best in those situations. Even if you can't strike effectively, you can still hope to frustrate their attacks as you attempt to re-establish range. It's generally faster to push forward than to backpeddle so the defender's at a disadvantage, but all you need to do is get the tip back between the two of you and that's certainly manageable. The other thing to do is to backpeddle towards allies, as the person pressing the assault generally can't guard against anyone else. And, since you're generally more likely to have allies behind you than enemies, that's often a quick and easy path to victory.

At LARP, a lot of people preach spear-behind-shield formations, but a good spearman out front can land some powerful hits and draw enemies with shorter weapons into suicidal charges where your allies can take them out while you backpeddle and defend. Formal Naginata unfortunately doesn't include team battles, but controlling distancing is still important. Every weapon, and every user, has both a minimum and maximum effective range. Against mismatched weapons, victory lies on controlling that range.

Psyx
2010-07-20, 03:49 AM
But you sure can disembowel.

Then use a knife that's built for that job, instead of for lopping limbs off. Blades curved and balanced like Kukris are predominantly chopping weapons, and not pleasant to be on the wrong end of! A good blow to a limb or shoulder and it's all over.





Bayonets and standard knives are a bit more useful as tools,


As others have said: Kukris are excellent for use as hatchets.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 04:08 AM
Just having actually used it and having had it used against me, I've always found pommel strikes easy to counter when they're used from the grip. The punch motion has very poor range and is slower than a normal punch (not much slower, but you can see the sword lining up for it), plus it pulls the sword out of position. Striking with the sword horizontal keeps the sword in a decent defensive position, but is extremely easy to see and block... or just aggressively out attack. The ice pick attacks are very easy to check as well by simply attacking the wrist (or grabbing it, or blocking it, whatever).

Meanwhile, a strike while holding a part of the weapon closer to the balance point is very hard to deal with, as it comes a lot faster and feels less predictable.

JaronK

I'm not advocating the punch or pommel as a primary attack form. It would be used more like this...

RED and BLACK face off, using arming sword and buckler. Both are in the Plow ward, with the sword and buckler held together waist level, point upwards.

RED begins with a stab towards the face. BLACK counters by parrying right and stepping in to bind with the buckler.

RED counters by returning the shield bind, drawing back his sword, and making a pommel strike at nearly point blank range.

At this point, BLACK could attempt to counter, but if he committed at all to the shield bind, his buckler is probably bound, and his sword as well. If he managed to free his sword before RED returned the bind, he could try to parry the pommel strike at the hilt, the hand, or the wrist, but he's parrying across his own body.


One instance where a shot you wouldn't normally use is actually useful. Hopefully this makes sense...

super dark33
2010-07-20, 04:25 AM
if you want to see a kukri "in action", go to the website of cold steel. they sell kukri, and ther are a show of using it.

Darth Stabber
2010-07-20, 05:27 AM
Honestly the debate over bayonet is rather strange to me. I remember in basic training the Drill sergeant saying that if you were told to affix bayonets you were pretty my screwed. The real idea at that point was to conserve ammo, and if you got to the point that you were stabbing a man with the bayonet you should probably pull the trigger too. Most of the close range stuff I was taught was merely bashing them with the butt of the rifle. Now if I was using a longer rifle say the M2 Garand of WWII fame there would be some reach associated with the bayonet as it is a rifle and not an assault rifle. Never get confused a rifle has more power, better range, and better accuracy than an assault rifle (eg M-16, or AK-47), though these weapons are not auto-fire. Don't confuse a rifle for an assault rifle, the difference is night and day to those that know how to use them.

CapnVan
2010-07-20, 05:27 AM
Yes. Running in like a maniac and bludgeoning them to death with the handle. :smallbiggrin:

Stabs are usually the best way to use a weapon in an army context. The hackey slashy weapons worked well for people who wore a lot of armour, and who fought people who wore less armour, but all in all, I just can't say I think they were all that dominant.

But a kukri can't be used for thrusting - there's no blade guard. Hit anything solid, like a shield, armor, or bone, and you're slicing your primary hand open as it slips down the blade.

JaronK
2010-07-20, 05:41 AM
Honestly the debate over bayonet is rather strange to me. I remember in basic training the Drill sergeant saying that if you were told to affix bayonets you were pretty my screwed. The real idea at that point was to conserve ammo, and if you got to the point that you were stabbing a man with the bayonet you should probably pull the trigger too.

Remember, the army's just giving you a basic overview. Your Drill Sergeant was mostly correct... they don't have time to teach you advanced combat with a bayonet on a rifle, because there's just more important things to teach. Melee combat in battle isn't exactly a priority for the US army, after all, and for good reason... they give you bullets, and intend you to shoot the enemy. So yeah, you're screwed if they're telling you to put on bayonets since that means you're probably out of ammo and the enemy likely isn't.

JaronK

JaronK
2010-07-20, 05:44 AM
One point that was mostly missed in this thread is that the Kukri is a utility knife of sorts, used much like a machete. It's as much for hacking your way through brush as it is for fighting enemies. And that's all overhand.

JaronK

Darth Stabber
2010-07-20, 05:45 AM
Remember, the army's just giving you a basic overview. Your Drill Sergeant was mostly correct... they don't have time to teach you advanced combat with a bayonet on a rifle, because there's just more important things to teach. Melee combat in battle isn't exactly a priority for the US army, after all, and for good reason... they give you bullets, and intend you to shoot the enemy. So yeah, you're screwed if they're telling you to put on bayonets since that means you're probably out of ammo and the enemy likely isn't.

JaronK

Doubly so if you are Air Force.

Aroka
2010-07-20, 05:47 AM
But a kukri can't be used for thrusting - there's no blade guard. Hit anything solid, like a shield, armor, or bone, and you're slicing your primary hand open as it slips down the blade.

That sounds like nonsense; the Finnish puukko has no blade guard either, and is definitely used for stabbing as well as cutting. (Indeed, the odds of killing someone with it by cutting aren't any good - you'll have to stab if you're trying to inflict lethal injury.)

Psyx
2010-07-20, 05:50 AM
Doubly so if you are Air Force.

Dude; if you get issued AMMUNITION in the Air Force; it's not a good sign!*









*SPs aside, duh! I realise that someone is going to be a pedant.

Tshern
2010-07-20, 06:01 AM
There's a huge difference between a longsword/greatsword and a bayonetted rifle... namely both ends of the rifle are supposed to be weapons. As such, it's shockingly fast when used correctly.

JaronK
From what we trained in the army, that's very true. The sad thing was that we had very little training against weapons other than bayonetted assault rifles, so I can't really take part to that debate.

Fhaolan
2010-07-20, 10:22 AM
Just as a note, and possibly a pointless note, the kukri most people are familiar with is the smallest version. Historical kukri's vary a lot more in size, and there are other weapons with the same profile all over, such as the falcatta, the kopis, the yataghan, etc.

All weapons with this profile feel, and move, like axes/hatchets. That's because they are heavily weighted towards the tip, and the striking edge is 'forward' fairly significantly to that of a straight blade.

Psyx
2010-07-20, 10:38 AM
The Falx was the one that had popped into my mind: A weapon that made the Roman army issue some hasty equipment revisions!

Horrible, horrible weapons.

Morph Bark
2010-07-20, 10:41 AM
I think I'm bothered more by weapon weights actually. That aside, since most people that are drawn with a kukri are from the wrong nationality, one would assume someone taught them how to wield it incorrectly. :smalltongue:

Just like katanas? :smalltongue:

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 10:42 AM
But a kukri can't be used for thrusting - there's no blade guard. Hit anything solid, like a shield, armor, or bone, and you're slicing your primary hand open as it slips down the blade.

This is wrong.

Due to analysis of period manuals and artwork, as well as the most prevalent wounds on surviving skeletal remains, it appears that the quillons did -not- primarily serve to prevent the hand from sliding up the blade, or another blade from sliding down onto the hand, but rather to provide leverage in grappling, to serve as another point of contact (used in an axelike stroke, like a pick), or to protect the hand when brought into sharp and sudden contact with a shield.

By this logic, the Scottish Dirk can't be used to stab. Which is pretty much what it was made for.

Thespianus
2010-07-20, 10:50 AM
That sounds like nonsense; the Finnish puukko has no blade guard either, and is definitely used for stabbing as well as cutting. (Indeed, the odds of killing someone with it by cutting aren't any good - you'll have to stab if you're trying to inflict lethal injury.)

The puukko appears to be a finnish equivalent of the swedish "morakniv" (unless there's a military version), and from what I can see on the interwebs, it's not really a weapon at all, but a carving knife used for woodcrafting or simple sea-related uses. Not something you'd ever want to issue your troops with as a fighting weapon.

Ofcourse you can kill with it, but you'd eventually cut yourself stabbing people with such a knife, unless you hold it with the butt end of the knife against the palm of your hand, to avoid slipping when stabbing something too hard to penetrate. Then you just hurt your hand. ;)

Dragosai
2010-07-20, 11:02 AM
I have a "real" Kukri that is at least 120 years old, and it is nothing like the weapons in pictures above. It is over a foot long before the bend in the blade, total length from handle down bend to tip is over two and half feet. Using it underhanded would be just dumb as the weapon is designed as a front heavy sword with axe like properties. So it hits very hard at the point of contact, but has a bigger blade area then an axe. The "small" kukri depicted in the above pictures, and from the size that D&D rules have used may make it feasible to use underhanded with the blade out for upwards cuts, but the old blade used by the original Gurkha was much bigger and would be a medium blade in D&D rules IMO. I can't see using the "big" kukri underhanded because of the weight it would have many downsides; much easier to disarm since your grip is not as strong that way i.e. the pinky being the focal point of weight vs. your index finger, it limits the type of strikes you can do, and even if one was to practice fighting in this underhanded style it would be very difficult to have the same kind of hitting power you would have with an overhand or side slash/thrust, and the reach factor as others have stated.

Sindri
2010-07-20, 11:06 AM
But a kukri can't be used for thrusting - there's no blade guard. Hit anything solid, like a shield, armor, or bone, and you're slicing your primary hand open as it slips down the blade.

If your grip is so bad that your hand will slip onto the blade, it will slip off the other end more easily, and then you have no weapon; all the worries about cutting your own hand open are not based in either reality or logic. The problem with thrusting with a kukri is that it has a very wide tip, which is not in line with the direction of the thrust, so you have less force over a wider area than, say, any narrow straight blade. A kukri is basically a fancier and slightly more versatile axe.

sonofzeal
2010-07-20, 11:07 AM
The puukko appears to be a finnish equivalent of the swedish "morakniv" (unless there's a military version), and from what I can see on the interwebs, it's not really a weapon at all, but a carving knife used for woodcrafting or simple sea-related uses. Not something you'd ever want to issue your troops with as a fighting weapon.

Ofcourse you can kill with it, but you'd eventually cut yourself stabbing people with such a knife, unless you hold it with the butt end of the knife against the palm of your hand, to avoid slipping when stabbing something too hard to penetrate. Then you just hurt your hand. ;)
I don't know about the puukko, but note that the kukri has a shaped hilt, rather than a straight one. This means that if you're holding it well, you shouldn't have any danger of cutting yourself. Since it fits solidly in the hand, it's not hard to have a very secure hold on it. Also note that a key foundation in any weapons training program is the nature of your grip on the weapon, and that anyone who's trained extensively with a particular weapon is going to have far better control of it and be far more secure with it than an average joe just picking it up and ramming it into something.

Finally, if we look over here (http://www.mineralmountain.com/images/kukri.jpg), especially at the upper one, we can see a small pseudo-guard which would be more than enough to prevent what you're talking about.

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 11:13 AM
Honestly the debate over bayonet is rather strange to me. I remember in basic training the Drill sergeant saying that if you were told to affix bayonets you were pretty my screwed. The real idea at that point was to conserve ammo, and if you got to the point that you were stabbing a man with the bayonet you should probably pull the trigger too. Most of the close range stuff I was taught was merely bashing them with the butt of the rifle. Now if I was using a longer rifle say the M2 Garand of WWII fame there would be some reach associated with the bayonet as it is a rifle and not an assault rifle. Never get confused a rifle has more power, better range, and better accuracy than an assault rifle (eg M-16, or AK-47), though these weapons are not auto-fire. Don't confuse a rifle for an assault rifle, the difference is night and day to those that know how to use them.

This really differed by era, and that's a part of the problem with kukuris. Around the 1700s, 1800s, a musket with bayonete was not a fast weapon in any sense. It could be over 5 feet with the blade, and significantly heavier than a spear of the same length. By the world wars, they were still in use, even if only for reassurance on those shorter guns, which is why hitting someone rapidly with a backhand swipe of the but of the rifle would really be reasonable, and today, much like the kukuri, they haven't got much in the way of necessity in combat.

Psyx
2010-07-20, 11:27 AM
"which is why hitting someone rapidly with a backhand swipe of the but of the rifle would really be reasonable"


Ours fall to bits if you try that...

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 11:28 AM
...

You still use WWI era rifles?

Edit: Some things you could do with an older gun, simply can't be done with newer technology. (Shooting bullets into water for one, according to mythbusters.) It wouldn't surprise me if certain new guns with their multiple complex components and funny plastic materials fell apart when handled too violently, but a WWI era gun was pretty much a club with a pipe and some springs.

Psyx
2010-07-20, 11:32 AM
L85A2.

They're not that bad now, apparently.

I mean... they were always blindingly accurate, comfortable to carry, and easy to fire... it's just that they stopped working far more than any weapon taken into in a combat zone ever has a right to.

Renegade Paladin
2010-07-20, 11:48 AM
There's a huge difference between a longsword/greatsword and a bayonetted rifle... namely both ends of the rifle are supposed to be weapons.
This is a huge difference? Hell, it's a difference at all? :smallconfused:

The amount of uninformed commentary in this thread is breathtaking. Yukitsu, I have to ask. Have you had any sort of armed martial arts training? Like, at all? Because your posts throughout this thread suggest that you do not.

I am not specifically trained in the kukri, but I've been taught how to wield daggers underhanded: Namely, don't. It greatly limits how the weapon can be used, and there is very little an underhanded grip can do that an overhand grip can't, thanks to the wonder that is the human wrist's ability to rotate. If a knife wielder really wants to come in underneath and disembowel somebody (not sure why one would, since the victim would die slowly and in such a way that would not prevent him from screaming bloody murder while doing it, but just for the sake of argument) all it takes is a rotated wrist and a swing-under motion of the arm. It imparts more force, can be done from farther away, isn't particularly difficult, accomplishes the same goal, and leaves scores of other options open at the same time while maximizing the wielder's ability to defend himself. (After all, if that bayonet strike does come, do you want a grip that the stroke will easily shove aside, or one that can stand and block it?) Really, there's no basis in either the actual use by the gurkhas or in the body of armed martial arts in general to use the weapon in the way you describe.

Fhaolan
2010-07-20, 12:11 PM
The Falx was the one that had popped into my mind: A weapon that made the Roman army issue some hasty equipment revisions!

Horrible, horrible weapons.

I've always wanted one of those. What I've been told is the falx is more scythe-like and less axe-like. More of a pick with a sharpened edge as it were. I can't say from personal experience on that one though. I've worked with kukri's, falcatta's and the like, but I've not had a chance to work with a falx.

Tiki Snakes
2010-07-20, 12:22 PM
I've noticed in the past five years or so, that underhanded grips are apparently all the rage with the cool kids, reguardless of whether it looks like a great way to lose your elbow.

See for reference, the silly girl from Soul Calibur with the bladed night-stick things, and that god awful excuse for character design that passes for the main character in the star-wars unleashed games.
I mean, lightsabers? Underhand Grip? really?

Kukri's underhanded seems almost logical in comparison, but otherwise it seems pretty clear that they are, infact, overhand weapons.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 12:33 PM
Getting back to the reason for this whole shebang.

OP:"Why do all the books show people using the kukri properly? That really pisses me off, since I'm cool and think that real-life Ghurkas, who never sheathe their weapons without shedding blood, use their choppy-knives upside down to gut people."
Everyone else: "No, they don't."

/thread

(The views expressed in this post are not necessarily those of the people who originally expressed them. Statements have been exaggerated for comedic purposes.)

Keld Denar
2010-07-20, 12:42 PM
You mean Tonfa's? Yea, those are silly weapons.

The only time I carry my knife underhanded is when I want to carry it in a locked position without revealing the fact that I have the weapon in a ready-to-use position. When I walk around the city at night, particularly in shady areas, I do carry my 3.5" Gerber lockblade in the open position. I've never had to use it, but one can never be too careful. I don't want everyone to see it though, and the underhanded grip allows the blade to be concealed partly by my sleave and partly by my forearm. If someone did jump out at me, I'd probably be most likely to attempt a downward stab than an upward cut, however. Anything more than that, and I'd probably break into a sprint screaming at the top of my lungs, as I'm not a trained combatant and wouldn't want to engage in an active over-hand style knife-fight with a similarly armed person, but the element of surprise is worth a million bucks because who actually expects the guy you jump on to have a knife already in his hand!

Fhaolan
2010-07-20, 12:45 PM
who never sheathe their weapons without shedding blood

I've always wondered where the true origin of this one is. I've heard it connected to pretty much every culture with a warrior class.

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 12:55 PM
I've always wondered where the true origin of this one is. I've heard it connected to pretty much every culture with a warrior class.

If it helps, it's an urban myth about the Ghurka. They use their knives to chop up veggies for evening stew more often than they use them to kill.

Darcy
2010-07-20, 01:01 PM
This thread is most coincidental- I'm fascinated with the Gurkha and today I started writing a little backstory for a small nation of Gurkha-like people in a book I'm (very, very slowly) working on.

Anywho... disemboweling is a relatively slow and ineffective method of killing someone, and I can't imagine developing a fighting style around giving someone an advantage for making that particular kind of wound. It's like trick shooting... flashy and cool but unnecessary, and less effective in battle. What I've read about it is that it's a slashing weapon, but overhand slashing is generally much more versatile. It's like the difference between gripping a crayon in your fist and holding a pen properly.

While this is probably just as romantic as the whole underhand gut-slash thing, I've always associated the kukri with cutting the throat, preferably in the dead of night during a stealth operation.

Psyx
2010-07-20, 01:16 PM
"as I'm not a trained combatant"

Being deadly serious for a moment: Then you really shouldn't be carrying a knife. Because if it comes to a fight, the odds are that that knife will end up sticking in you.

Knifes are bloody horrible things. The only thing that's certain in a street knife-fight is that you're going to get cut. It's also dreadfully easy to kill someone with a knife, it means that if you do get mugged, you've just potentially escalated it into a lethal confrontation and forced the aggressor to up his own stakes.... possibly from attempted robbery to attempted murder. And if things get to the point where the police arrive and you were carrying a knife in your hand before the fight started, the 'self defence' thing kind of goes out the window.

Stick to a rolled up newspaper, roll of coins, baton, or pool cue.



"You mean Tonfa's? Yea, those are silly weapons."

The police disagree...

Aroka
2010-07-20, 01:16 PM
While this is probably just as romantic as the whole underhand gut-slash thing, I've always associated the kukri with cutting the throat, preferably in the dead of night during a stealth operation.

I would think any soldier who has to use a knife to kill would prefer to do it just like that... if you have to use a knife, you'd at least hope the other person doesn't get a chance to fight back. (Knife-on-knife fights are a horrible prospect, generally; even if you "win", odds are good you'll be badly cut or stabbed.)

Tiki Snakes
2010-07-20, 01:50 PM
"You mean Tonfa's? Yea, those are silly weapons."

The police disagree...

The ol' nightsticks themselves, (actual Tonfa's) aren't particularly bad, but Talim uses bladed ones.
http://mitchie-info.hp.infoseek.co.jp/ga_img/talim.jpg

and apparently some random dark jedi from Star-Wars Unleashed uses lightsaber versions;
http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/f20071031/img/2_bg.jpg

As if underhanded grip style lightsabers weren't bad enough!

FreakyCheeseMan
2010-07-20, 02:18 PM
Hmm... I've had some martial arts training (about a year, before I hurt my shoulder and had to take a break), which included some knife work. While that far from makes me an expert, both my teacher's were blackbelts. (The older one had a I-don't-know-whatth degree in Aikido, but what he actually practiced was more along the lines of an extra-aggressive Aiki Jiu Jitsu, the younger one had a blackbelt in Aikido and another in... I want to say Shao-Lin Tiger/Hawk Kung fu, but my memory may be fault). Anyway, they both had knife fighting days, and both said that underhand and overhand are equally legitimate; there are one or two techniques that work better with underhand that I know of. (Catch your opponent's wrist between yours and your knifes, jerk back to pull them off balance, step through and sever their carotid artery, step forward and stab back into their kidney).

As for the legitimacy of knives as weapons... I personally love them, they're probably my favorite weapon, but no, I'd never use them for self defense in a city. I'd want one handy on a battlefield, but... well, I can do three things with a knife: I can scare them, which might work, or might make them up the stakes; I can kill them with a lucky stab, which I really don't want to do, or I get into a protracted fight where I try to weaken them with blood loss until they cease to be a threat, which poses great risk to me, and might end with them dead anyway. Stick with coshes, stun guns or pepper spray. Actually, just make sure you're paying attention and don't look like a target- if you make sure the guy starting to follow you knows you know he is, nine times out of ten he'll back off and look for easier prey.

Coidzor
2010-07-20, 02:22 PM
Hmm, I better show this thread to my friend who fell in love with underhanded grip from Aikido knife exercises.

Mostly because he can't imagine overhand grip.

FreakyCheeseMan
2010-07-20, 02:27 PM
Hmm, I better show this thread to my friend who fell in love with underhanded grip from Aikido knife exercises.

Mostly because he can't imagine overhand grip.

*Rolls eyes*

Gee, perfect timing. I ninja'd you and you still managed to cut me.

Coidzor
2010-07-20, 02:36 PM
*Rolls eyes*

Gee, perfect timing. I ninja'd you and you still managed to cut me.

Well I can't help it. This is like the first time I've ever seen you post on here!

FreakyCheeseMan
2010-07-20, 02:45 PM
Well I can't help it. This is like the first time I've ever seen you post on here!

Right. And the *one time* I do, you pop up to discredit me the second it goes through.

*suspicious eyes*

I'm onto you...

Darcy
2010-07-20, 03:28 PM
This page contains a number of images demonstrating kukri fighting drills, giving an idea of how they're used:
kukri! (http://www.himalayan-imports.com/gurkha.html)

It seems totally possible that you can use it underhanded, but I haven't actually seen it yet.

Greenish
2010-07-20, 03:32 PM
I recall seeing a couple of illustrations for kukris (or rather, PrCs wielding them) in D&D manuals, in which they hold it underhanded with the curve pointing inwards.

I have no idea on how'd that work.

Bharg
2010-07-20, 03:55 PM
So the OP is wrong? Overhand use is very common and logical.
Kukri improbability actually very probable?

Maeglin_Dubh
2010-07-20, 03:55 PM
So the OP is wrong? Overhand use is very common and logical.
Kukri improbability actually very probable?

OP is wrong.

/thread

Thespianus
2010-07-20, 06:40 PM
I don't know about the puukko, but note that the kukri has a shaped hilt, rather than a straight one.
Yes, I found out later that there are military versions of the puukko that has a shaped hilt. The "traditional" version seems to be the carving knife used for woodcraft, though, ie a basically straight, slightly convex hilt with no guard shape whatsoever.

But there are apparently shaped hilt versions as well.

Mike_G
2010-07-20, 06:47 PM
Doubly so if you are Air Force.

Oh, the Air Force.

I though we were talking about the military.

Darth Stabber
2010-07-20, 08:56 PM
Oh, the Air Force.

I though we were talking about the military.

Ouch! Some truth to it, but ouch.

In retrospect I should probably not trust the Hitlery Channel. This is not the first time I have lost a debate based on information gleaned from that source. So yes, I concede, overhand kukri probably the the win. Still a really cool weapon. And working a Gurkha Corps expy into your D&D game is easy and rewarding, just make them sneaky spec ops types and they work (I also played one with levels in Dread Commando). I don't recommend faking a British accent however, as players may throw dice at you for doing so. If you actually have a British accent, I am jealous.

Yukitsu
2010-07-20, 09:14 PM
Stuff

I've said pretty repeatedly, that less the applicability of an underhand grip, and more a lack of appreciation for overhand hacking. In any military formation, which was what they were at their hayday most useful for, you don't have room to do much in the way of fancy knife work, such as "standing back and blocking it" as you describe. I'm also not convinced it was a main hand weapon in the era.

huttj509
2010-07-20, 10:36 PM
Ouch! Some truth to it, but ouch.

In retrospect I should probably not trust the Hitlery Channel. This is not the first time I have lost a debate based on information gleaned from that source. So yes, I concede, overhand kukri probably the the win. Still a really cool weapon. And working a Gurkha Corps expy into your D&D game is easy and rewarding, just make them sneaky spec ops types and they work (I also played one with levels in Dread Commando). I don't recommend faking a British accent however, as players may throw dice at you for doing so. If you actually have a British accent, I am jealous.

Except I think that history channel clip was linked in this thread, and the strike demonstrated there was an overhand grip, but was a slash upwards with a turned wrist. It was definitely not a chop motion, but it was still an overhand grip, which is apparently correct.

As to knife fighting, if you know what you're doing there are many options with both an overhand and underhand grip. However, a Kukri is not a knife. It is larger (well, assuming you're not named Crocodile), and weighted differently, meaning that if you try fighting with it as you would with, say, a butterfly knife, you will have problems.

Ok, a Kukri probably is considered a type of knife, but you know what I mean, right?

Tshern
2010-07-21, 12:36 AM
and apparently some random dark jedi from Star-Wars Unleashed uses lightsaber versions;
http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/f20071031/img/2_bg.jpg


Maris Brood.

Psyx
2010-07-21, 04:06 AM
"Gurkha Corps"

Brigade. Made up of Regiments. No Corps involved.


"I don't recommend faking a British accent however"

Nor I: Ghurkas don't really speak very much English at all, and it's a second language. Only the officers (who are native British) have an English accent.

Darcy
2010-07-21, 11:32 AM
Except I think that history channel clip was linked in this thread, and the strike demonstrated there was an overhand grip, but was a slash upwards with a turned wrist. It was definitely not a chop motion, but it was still an overhand grip, which is apparently correct.

As to knife fighting, if you know what you're doing there are many options with both an overhand and underhand grip. However, a Kukri is not a knife. It is larger (well, assuming you're not named Crocodile), and weighted differently, meaning that if you try fighting with it as you would with, say, a butterfly knife, you will have problems.

Ok, a Kukri probably is considered a type of knife, but you know what I mean, right?
It's halfway between a knife and a hatchet... and who would use a hatchet underhand?

Tyndmyr
2010-07-21, 04:23 PM
The only time I carry my knife underhanded is when I want to carry it in a locked position without revealing the fact that I have the weapon in a ready-to-use position. When I walk around the city at night, particularly in shady areas, I do carry my 3.5" Gerber lockblade in the open position.

Yknow, this sounds a wee bit paranoid. I've lived in some of the highest murder rate areas in the country(heya fellow baltimore and DC types), and honestly, the best way to avoid getting in trouble is to just mind your own business, and know the area. Walking around with a drawn knife is just asking for trouble. Especially if you don't know how to use it.

Greenish
2010-07-21, 06:20 PM
Especially if you don't know how to use it.Using a knife in a fight is pretty simple: you drop it and run.

true_shinken
2010-07-21, 06:50 PM
My city has a higher violent death rate than several war areas around the world.

You survive fights by not fighting at all. Stay away from trouble, keep your cool at all times and learn to run.
Carrying a knife here in Rio will get you killed really fast.

Mike_G
2010-07-21, 07:10 PM
I've talked my way out of a lot of potential fights. And I do know how to use a knife.