By March 31, 2008

How Many Five Year Olds Can You Fight at Once?

With some luck, I may find out how accurate this quiz is.

How many five year olds could you take on at one time, assuming no weapons and no body armor?

34 five year olds. Hell yeah.


Take it yourself here!

A breakdown of my answers follow the jump.

  1. Athletic
  2. Fairly good reach
  3. Average balance
  4. Can kick 2-3 feet
  5. Tall in height
  6. 21-35
  7. A few years’ worth of martial arts experience
  8. 8+ fights, lifetime
  9. Fought against the zerg
  10. Yes, I have been trampled, by a horse and a donkey (not on the same day, thankfully).
  11. You mean people don’t fight dirty?
  12. To hell with morality 🙂
  13. I’ll do whatever it takes to win. Hell, I may do it just to see the look on other kid’s faces.
No tags for this post.
Posted in: gibberish, link and run

11 Comments on "How Many Five Year Olds Can You Fight at Once?"

Trackback | Comments RSS Feed

  1. markie says:

    No weapons?
    No body armor?
    What kind of crap game is this…

  2. mahuddle1 says:

    26 five-year-olds

    1 – average
    2 – average
    3 – average
    4 – more than 3 feet
    5 – average
    6 – 21-35
    7 – skilled
    8 – 8 or more
    9 – no
    10 – no
    11 – yes
    12 – morality? they started it!
    13 – yes, when you’re fighting dozens

    I’d like to see how many 85-year-olds I could take on at once. What’s the damage on a walker? If they don’t have their hearing aid in, is that a sneak attack?

  3. Starbuck says:

    17 five year olds – give me a break i am 5’6″ and a girl

    1-Average Body
    2-Average Reach
    3-Average Balance
    4-More than 3 feet
    5-Average height
    6- 21-35
    7-A little
    8-None, not counting the times by brother tried to beat me up as a kid and then getting bit by a 95 lb dog in the process
    9-No swarm chasing
    10-No trampling – I think I have in my dreams and almost in a pit at a concert, but i push and punch back 🙂
    12-I’ll do what it takes to win
    13-see #12

  4. roclar says:

    “You could take on 23 five year old kids in a fight.”

    I went with:
    1) Average body
    2) I have a fairly good reach (freakish reach sadly unavailable)
    3) I’m not very balanced
    4) More than 3 feet
    5) Very tall
    6) 21-35
    7) None
    8) None
    9) Yes (again zerg)
    10) No trample damage here
    11) Maybe (no fight exp. so not entirely sure)
    12) To hell with morality if they are comin’ at me
    13) Shamefully, thats a yeppers.

  5. Ed says:

    26, Mike and I are twins! he is more skilled, but I am dirtier and more trampled (yay Mosh pit), and I have slain the mighty zerg.

  6. Me! says:

    1-avg body
    2-good reach
    3-excellent balance
    4-more then 3ft
    5-avg height
    7-a little
    9-no swarms
    10-no trampling
    11-no fighting dirty
    12-to hell with morality
    13-i’ll do what it takes to win


  7. The Lawyer (TM) says:

    Only 21. Better than nothing, I guess.

  8. Ed says:

    Hmm, according to the poll the most vicious bastard alive could only take 39. Perhaps I didn’t read the rules, but if I was a body building kung fu master with experience in fighting swarms of children zombies, I bet I could take a lot more.

    I mean, after 20 or so couldn’t you build a body barricade? Then the few seconds that gives you you can tear out some intestines and heads, and make yourself a kick ass weapon. Even armor. Nope, I think the ruthless monstrosity with experience answer should have ended with hundreds of dead kiddies.

    Well, I guess we will have to unleash the kiddie swarm virus and just see what happens.

  9. Rostyslav says:

    Haha, 33! I love it. But part of me feels like this is wrong, but, whatever.

  10. Raclaire says:

    HEY! I have a 5 year old AND a 3 year old. I’m no fool… I’d HIDE!!!!!!!! LOL

  11. the Accountant (tm) says:

    For Mahuddle – the 90 year old version