[Craig Peters]

I know we've had a thread like this before, but I couldn't resist.

As many of you already know, there have been some bizarre cases recently of people attacking other people and eating them. While these cases are probably just isolated instance of cannibalism, others think we may be nearing the zombie apocalypse. So when the apocalypse comes, how will you protect yourself when things get up close and personal?

Even the most ardent sword enthusiast is probably going to want some sort of firearm to deal with zombies when things go bad. Let's face it: firearms allow you to take out zombies at long range, and weapons like shotguns and rifles have a lot of stopping power that can put a zombie down in a hurry. But firearms have disadvantages as well. A gun makes a lot of noise, even if you supress it, which is not exactly what you want when there are hordes of zombies nearby. An even bigger problem is that once you're out of ammo, you'd better hope you can find more in a hurry, because a gun without ammo is all but useless in the face of a swarm of the undead.

Obviously, besides your trusty firearms, you are going to want a back-up weapon that you can use, something that doesn't run out of ammunition. So the question is: what do you take as your back-up, ammunition-less weapon, and why?

[Craig Peters]

My back up of choice: Albion Armorer's Next Generation Duke Great Sword

When you have to kill zombies with a hand-held weapon, you need something that can split skulls with authority. Albion's Duke, with it's broad, spatulate blade, is the perfect choice. A long sword with a wickedly acute thrusting point might be outstanding for penetrating zombie skulls, but the last thing you need is to get your sword stuck in a zombie when there are hordes of them nearby. Similarly, a kriegsmesser like the Knecht might be a better cutter, but the Duke allows you to make a follow up short edge attack in a hurry if you need to. The Duke has the range of a polearm, but unlike a spear or a halberd, you don't face the problem of being impotent once the zombie gets past the head of the weapon; you can still cleave into a zombie within a few inches of the hilt of the blade. If you find yourself feeling tired from using the Duke, you can still halfsword with it and drive the point into the decaying face of your foe.

[Sam Barris]

This question has become much easier to answer in the last few weeks. She was almost a Svante, and then chose a different path in life. Behold!

I can think of nothing better with which to face the undead hordes when the guns run dry.

[Robin Smith]

No way I am carrying a sword. Far too great of a risk of infection from blood spatter. Just remember, its not just the bites that get you. Blood spatter, or even just a scratching your skin with their fingernails is sufficient.

Also,all the issues about gun shots being loud and alerting the enemy apply equally to a modern battlefield, and yet swords are not carried there. If you're worried about running out of ammo, a better use of the space and weight of a sword is to carry more ammo. That space and weight is better used for loaded magazines than for a single purpose tool that you would only use in absolute desperation.

At most, I would carry a machete. Atleast then it has a function primarily as a camp tool, that can in a pinch be used as a sword. Most of the techniques from HEMA are no good anyway, since cuts that don't disable the brain are fairly ineffective. A machete would be adequate.

[Nathan Quarantillo]

Zornhau, Zwerch, Oberhau, Mittelhau, Krumphau, parting strike (forgetting the German name) all of those cuts could easily target the head/neck area. HEMA stuff could be pretty effective IMO.

[Mike Harris]

Pondering this topic, one thought comes to mind. This could be the motivating factor for the revival of the falchion or large messer as an everyday companion.

[Simon Whittle]

It also seems to me that armour would be quite useful when defending oneself from the shuffling masses; a full covering of mail would probably be enough to protect you from any biting or clawing, though if the zombies had the dexterity to attempt to remove the armour, it might be less effective. It would also seem that a Greek phalanx in a bottleneck would probably keep zombies out very well, though simply having a fortified wall that you could rain bullets from would be better in every way. As my sidearm, I would probably go for any of the A&A pole hammers or pole axes because of their longer reach and versatility, though, as Robin said, the best sidearm would be more bullets.

[Craig Peters]

[Roger Hooper]

A poll-axe would come in handy. You could keep your distance and still reach those zombie heads with spike, hammer or axe. It would be good for swinging in a large circle as well. With an overall length of 67 inches, Arms and Armor's version will be short enough to carry around without too much trouble.

[Craig Peters]

Also, keep in mind that not every member of the board lives in a country where it is legal to possess a firearm. In my current location, it is very difficult to legally own a gun. If the zombie apocalypse broke-out here tomorrow, my only means of protection could well be my Tritonia. I'm sure there's a police station not far from here, which is the first place where I'd go, but it would be a short walk with a ton of zombies, and it might just be better to hide and/or flee.

[Michael Parker]

Nathan, your parting strike is a "scheitelhau".

The "perfect anti-zombie weapon" debate is always pretty hairy just because people don't agree on the characteristics of zombies. "Classic" zombies shamble around slowly and infect you by biting you. Of course, whether the plague is a bacteria, virus, or a magical curse depends on whose story you are referencing. We get our zombie legends from African voodoo and bo traditions, but clearly a lot has been lost or changed in translation. Lately, so-called "fast zombies" have become a lot more fashionable, such as in the movie of 'I am Legend" and the videogame "Left 4 Dead" (though in "I am Legend", the zombies share characteristics with vampires such as hatred of sunlight, while I hear the book was about vampires). One crucial difference is whether zombies are defined as "the undead" or more loosely as the "infected". In those versions the zombies aren't so much shambling rotting corpses as they are grotesquely infected and rabid people, who run at you at top speed trying to turn you or eat your flesh. The whole "aim for the head" thing also varies with what source you like best. Max Brooks' "World War Z" and "Sean of the Dead" with Simon Pegg are more traditional in insisting the zombies will keep getting up unless you remove the head or destroy the brain. Max Brooks explains this by showing how zombies' bodily fluids become more viscous and their brain stops relying on the body for nourishment, so that even if you cut one in half the zombie will not bleed to death and its top half will stay alive. It's even scarier if you imagine that zombies can hibernate or survive for long periods without food. However, Left 4 Dead just throws that out and says that if you shoot or dismember them enough then they will bleed to death, even if the head stays on.

The method of infection is important too. If your infection transmits only by being bitten you have some leeway, but if it is by coming in contact with zombie fluids then you have to avoid physical contact at all costs and close range fighting is likely to get you infected even if you survive combat. On the other hand if the virus is depicted as airborne and especially if it were capable of being carried by vectors other than humans then you might have a hard time not getting infected anyway. If you're still around when everyone else has been turned into zombies it might mean you're immune to the airborne form, bite-transmitted form, or both, in which case risking a few scratches in melee combat might be a viable option. Which of these rules apply would basically determine whether you stand a chance in close combat.

A quick survey of our monsters shows that zombie is in fact a very flexible term for all manner of flesh eating rabid human creatures, who are so different from each other that they are probably suffering from very different diseases or curses. It's all up to the author's imagination and there is no right or wrong way to do it. Regular human cannibals, of course, can be dispatched with the sword since the sword is designed to kill people, but in order to determine what weapons are fit to kill zombies we need to specify which zombies we are trying to fight.

[Robin Smith]

[Mike Harris]

Another random thought on controlling such creatures, given they are of the mindless variety, is to attract them to a fence or wall or other impediment to their forward progress. Then use a thrusting spear to deal with many in rapid succession by thrusting through the cranio-ocular opening. Seems like you'd want a spear without any sort of sideways protrusions like wings or halberd head to minimize the chances another creature might be able to grab hold of the tip. Thus gives rise to the post-apocolyptic game of "Poke A Zed, In The Head", guaranteed to be fun for all ages (that survive).

[David Lewis Smith]

a Jody Sampson signed piece.



That should do the trick, the bow behind it gives me some distance options that does not make noise

[Lloyd Clark]

One word: flamethrower....just sayin'

[Craig Peters]

[Bryan W.]

My backup is being a level 30 Priest I can destroy Zombies at will and my protection wards work wonders for while I sleep.....

For everyone else though this question depends on the TYPE of zombie apocalypse, type of zombie, route of transmission, weaknesses....we all know there are hundreds of types of zombies....

My advice: Change your name to Ash, buy a book on Chemistry 101, get a good blacksmith friend to make you a robotic hand and learn some cool catch phrases.

[Mike Harris]

[Robin Smith]

[Eric Meulemans]

A sword is definitely not my choice of weapon for use against zombies of any type. Assuming you just need to cave in their cranium, then a mace or other bludgeon is the way to go. Fast, easy to handle, doesn't get dull(er), unlikely to break, easy to carry without injuring yourself or others, decreased distribution of potential contaminates, and unlikely to get stuck in a skull at an inopportune time.

Of course, primary weapon is a shotgun. And a Calico .22 as a backup arm. Again, assuming all that's needed is to penetrate the braincase and mix up the contents.

Remember: Kill the brain, and you kill the ghoul. It's not rocket science. Unless you use rockets...