Dual wielding combat

Users who are viewing this thread

There is certainly a difference between inventing and making popular. I can give a well known example of a fantasy character written before Salvatore was even born. Galdalf was a dual wielder with both sword and staff. He used both in The Hobbit as well as wielding both Glamdring and his wizard's staff against the Balrog in The Fellowship, and I am not talking about the movies but the actual novels. Who knows, maybe Salvatore was inspired by Tolkien, the father of modern fantasy?

Agreed about popularizing or inventing, but Gandalf is not a good example. He used a staff. He may have even used a sword. I've read that entire series and he never used both at the same time.

Drizzt brought that idea to our conciousness... Tolkien didnt.
 
I think it was probably old martial arts movies that made dual wielding popular. Me and my friends were playing at dual wielding toy swords long before anybody ever heard of RA Salvatore
 
Damnn... yall must be fun at parties coming out with "DuAL WiELdING iS UnReAlIsTic", well wandering around the game world for months without sleep or rest isn't realistic either lol

It's a game, a game that desperately needs more content added to its shallow self.

It's not real life
 
It's a game, a game that desperately needs more content added to its shallow self.

That it does, and I agree with you on the realism debate, but as far as I am concerned there's a lot of things I would love to see in game before the dual wielding argument is brought up.

To be honest though, I think the discussion is moot. There's several threads on this topic that were made for Bannerlord, same thing happened for Warband, I just don't think TW and ultimately Armagan are really interested in considering the idea (if they were, it probably would have made it in Warband or at least one of the DLCs).
 
I'd love to see dual-wielding combat if that's possible. Two axes, two swords, two daggers, hell maybe even two spears.
careful the "uNrEaLiStIc" crew will attack you relentlessly. Even though it is.


Dual wielding is an invention of R.A. Salvatore that video games adopted and ran with.

People didn't fight with 2 swords or 2 axes: it's pure fantasy bull****.
In actuality they did, but not 2 swords or 2 axes (though these less useful likely happened)... Mostly a dagger with a sword. Japanese used dual wield too, mostly Wakizashi with Katana, but if I'm not mistaken there were accounts of the use of dual Katana. Dual wielding 2 longswords would be retarded (even though possible), as for dual wielding short swords I see no problem, but if I were them I would prefer a shield instead.

Biggest issue in BL or M&B in general is how the combat works, I think it can't support dual wielding properly.
 
Would be cool. Too many people think of it as mass used, when it can just be option for the heroes/player and only with 100+ one handed for example. Too many biased tunneled players here
 
Oh boy now comes the 'muh realism' crowd.
"This cuirass only has three straps on the side but historically it had four! Might as well have dragons and magic in this game!"

Seriously though while duel wielding might be fun, it may be a bit out of place in this game.
 
Oh boy now comes the 'muh realism' crowd.
"This cuirass only has three straps on the side but historically it had four! Might as well have dragons and magic in this game!"

Seriously though while duel wielding might be fun, it may be a bit out of place in this game.

Dual wielding and blocking arrows with swords perk====== LOTRs mods.
 
Damnn... yall must be fun at parties coming out with "DuAL WiELdING iS UnReAlIsTic", well wandering around the game world for months without sleep or rest isn't realistic either lol

It's a game, a game that desperately needs more content added to its shallow self.

It's not real life
In that case, let's add guns and nukes, yay more content!
 
There are a lot of games that fill the high fantasy niche:

1. Duel Wielding
2. Sword blocking arrows
3. Gigantic trained animals as pets.
4. Dragons

I even like those games. I can't wait for Pathfinder Wrath.

Mount and Blade has a unique niche. It's not high fantasy. It's more of a medieval simulator, loosely based on history. There are very few games that do that well.

I don't think Talesworld is going to sacrifice their identity to please the dual wield crowd. Mount and Blade is the big dog in the medieval simulator realm. There just another number if they change it to fantasy.
 
Last edited:
Without any other intent, let me just add a bit of info for reference...

1. Musashi fought in ONE battle in his entire life. The rest of the samurai who spent their entire lives on the battle field, never used dual wielding.

2. There is serious contention that Miyamoto Musashi was actually a "LARP."

3. Records during the Sengoku era point to around 60% of battlefield deaths attributed to projectiles(arrows, stones, guns), 30% by spears, and only 10% by swords.

4. Both in Europe and Japan, swords were side-weapons.. The mainstay of Japanese armies during the mid/late Sengoku era became the pike infantry. In a typical order of battle, a Sengoku army would consist of around 60% pike infantry, 30% bowmen, 10% teppu. The Japanese did not have cavalry as a military unit. Only a handful of commanding nobles would be on a horse.


...Dual wielding is just a myth, both in the West and the East. It doesn't work in army-scale battles, and had only limited use in civilian environment, particularly in the dueling scene.

Why do you insist upon being a clown?

You've asspulled so many times on this forum in the past month, I'm actually a little embarrassed for you.

1. Musashi is respected because of his widely accepted participation in over 60 deathmatches. You're intentionally not including that information, and also trying to imply that only "battlefield" experience means something -- even though the other weaponmaster you've quoted in the past had zero battlefield experience! You know how to twist facts and lie by omission, but the people who haven't experienced your hypocritical tactics in the past won't understand how manipulative you're choosing to be.

2. You got that idea on this forum. Literally any one of us can google him and see your claim isn't true. Again with the spreading of misinformation that you hope people will take at face value, instead of doing a little research.

3. Right, because in ancient Japan they recovered corpses on the battlefield and took note of how they died. I'd like you to provide one source for this claim, so we can all have a good laugh. You've made absolutely bogus claims in the past, but this could be a brand new level of unintentionally hilarious/sad.

4. Here is an easy one:


Amongst the Imperial aristocracy, some were especially renowned for their horsemanship.[22] It was cavalry, not infantry, which proved to be decisive in the Jinshin War of 672–673, in Fujiwara no Hirotsugu's rebellion in 740 and in the revolt of Fujiwara no Nakamaro in 756.[23]

Samurai fought as cavalry for many centuries,[24] and horses were used both as draft animals and for war.[25] The increasingly elaborate decorations on harnesses and saddles of the samurai suggests the value accorded to these war horses.[21]

Yabusame archers, Edo period
The samurai were particularly skilled in the art of using archery from horseback. They used methods of training such as yabusame, which originated in 530 AD and reached its peak under Minamoto no Yoritomo (1147–1199 AD) in the Kamakura period.[26] The conventions of warfare in Japan switched from an emphasis on mounted bowmen to mounted spearmen during the Sengoku period (1467–1615).

Amongst the samurai, Tokugawa Ieyasu (1543–1616) was known as an excellent horseman, which forms the foundation of an anecdote about the shōgun's character. One day he and his troops had to cross a very narrow bridge over a raging river. All were wondering how he would ride over this dangerous bridge. Ieyasu dismounted, led the horse over the bridge to the other side, and then he re-mounted his steed.[27] At Nikkō, the burial place of the horse ridden by Ieyasu Tokugawa in the Battle of Sekigahara is marked with an inscribed stone.[28]

Saying "the Japanese did not have cavalry as a military unit" betrays your utter lack of knowledge and peddling of personal views as historical fact that are a hallmark of your forum posting habits.


All that being said, dual wielding took a level of skill that was uncommon IRL, but when used correctly it was very strong in single combat. George Silver mentioned the use of sword + dagger many times, and there was use of katana + wakizashi in Japan since they existed side-by-side.

There was even a school of combat in Japan that sought to use two katanas as adeptly as a katana + waz.

Anyway, cool idea for the game but I don't see it happening, unfortunately.
 
You cant save any forum from the nay sayers. They dont want your facts, they could easily have looked up everything that is said here but they never do, they only search for stuff to support their own ideas. I think they get a high on arguing. ?‍♂️
 
Another one of these threads, oof.

This has been discussed many times over the past 15 years.


TL;DR: 333 pages of heavy debate for/against dual wielding, no one changed anyone else's minds, and it is not implemented into base game. There are many more threads like this. I do believe if the ability to mod the Bannerlord engine is a good as the devs have hinted at, I'm sure there will be many mods after release that can make it happen, but I wouldn't hold out for it being included in base game.
 
Back
Top Bottom