Who would win...

[Dark Luther]

I'll leave the discussion open, and will put my input later...
This has been visited a number of times in countless threads...,
but I believe there are factors that are never really addressed,
plus this is the first of a series of these threads...

The basis of this is the class of fighter - not the person, or human factor...

One is allowed to take into account the size and structure of the two -
as a knight from a particular area would be obviously larger and have differant proportions than a samurai...

One can also argue the differant time periods -
medieval knight is quite differant from the latter gothic era knight in late renaissance...
While the samurai from the warring states period would greatly differ from one from the differant shogunates...

So if you know about this stuff - feel free to go into depth,
and give multible opinions...
don't just say...., a knight...
or..., a samurai...
( Also, the ninja thing is kinda tired, and will be discussed in another thread )

[Kaffee]

I gotta say Samurai, they're more disciplined.

[Dark Marmosett]

I dunno. I'd have to go with knight. Despite samurai being quicker. Their swords aren't probably as good or as strong as a knights and probably won't do much against their armor.

[Kurbee]

I am going to go with Samurai.

Because, I admire their code of Honor. o.o;;

[Dark Marmosett]

.......... Kevin. Luther said don't just say Samurai or Knight. You just mainly did >.>

[Rainbow Dash]

Samurai, I really don't see too much that knights have that they don't.

[Snips]

It all comes down to what kinds of weapons are used. Knights (I forget which era I'm referring to), or to be specific, those in the cavalry, tended to use Lances, but had a sword at their side for when their lance broke or should their horse be killed. However, a ronin (lordless samurai) from the warring states period might not have had enough money to afford a backup weapon, if one was to even be carried at all. I'll also add here that japanese Katanas are much stronger than european blades.

Between various kinds of Samurai and knights, it's a fairly even match. However, I believe that Samurai (at least those in service, not the masters) probably trained more (at least during the warring states period) than knights, who often had duties to atend to, or even land to oversee. So, yeah, I'd guess a Samurai from the warring states period.

[Altima]

I'll say samurai because their armor was lighter and they were faster. Ancient knights armor was so heavy that if they fell off of their horses they had to have help getting up.

[Dark Luther]

It's a very good point...
Japanese swords in general were of better quality, and have been proven - despite their thin profile - to be able to surpass that of european swords, of which I commonly use in fights...
( they have tested these swords and folded steel have cut through heavy hand and a halfs made of lesser material...)


But this is a side issue - as the armor factor is something everyone always brings up...
But one thus ignores the fact that Japanese Samurai had an array of weapons meant to deal with armor.
There were several weapons that were specificly meant to pierce armor like a war pick and war hammer -
and others meant to bludgeoun like a mace - such as a tetsubo...
They also had numerous encounters with heavy armor - in their wars invading the Korean peninsula.

On the other hand - the night also had an array of weapons and weapon tactics that would surprise most.
Though Samurai had superior training and technique -

I really challenge anyone to call me out on this,
I've seen the German, French, Italian, and other manuals and forms - and they lack the ability of the better swords styles I have witnessed....except for kendo...-

I still will give the benefit to the knight, who had ability with a wider variety of weapons to defeat a particular opponent - as compared to a samurai who most likely had a focus on the katana or naginata..., both of which can defeat armor though - I just wouldn't reccomend it...


Well, I think I would then ask what weapon the knight would choose to defeat a samurai,
and vice versa...


( also take into account a knight could be a mercenary too, poor just as a ronin, just as a samurai - who by very defenition means someone's vassal - could be well equipped and armored...)