Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

Currently viewing this thread:

Tsukana

Sergeant
ares007 said:
Tsukana said:
That doesn't change the fact that it's easily the most fail thing we could possibly be doing. Unfortunately it's also the ONLY thing we could possibly be doing.

Thus the 100 year old thread.
actually, there are a number of things that could be improved. For example, making shields more fun to use would be one area of improvement... (my suggestion: accurately represent the physical size of the shield allowing people to strike around it much easier, but also also allow for simultaneous stirke/directional-block. But that is for another thread)

The reason this thread is still around? Simply because we are entertained by all the noobs and continue to feed them with arguments. In short, this thread is fun.
I was referring to the "make-shield-into-weapon-model" thing. And, you're quite right, shields do need improved. Happy side effect of doing so would probably be a working dual wielding for the modders who want to do it. Everyone's happy.
 

Blackthorn

Squire
The problem with the shields is that they're bolted-on to the combat model, rather than central to it- which I understand if you're a programmer rather than a medievalist. The system could be improved... but where do you draw the line between throwing everything out and starting from scratch?
I just hope that the people behind the Kinnect and the people behind M+B sit down for a beer... it wouldn't be perfect, but damn it'd be close.
 

tostig

Sergeant Knight at Arms
M&B
Personally, during combat with large swords with significant cutting ability, I feel that thrusting is mainly useful as a method to counter the forward motion of a very aggressive fighter or as a finish of a grappling action. But it is still only one technique among many other very important ones. (As an aside, one of the five "master cuts" of the "German school" is particularly suited to simultaneously striking a blow to the head while deflecting a thrust)

Yet doesn't Lichtenauer's Zedel (or at least the Dobringer glossa) say that you should use each of the three wounders from the eight windings?

Hell, the zorn-ort is the most basic technique there is, and is almost implicitly aggressive - you have to follow up the displacement with a stab while still moving.

For me thrusts are integral to fighting with the longsword, or at least understanding how to work in the bind.
 

ares007

Master Knight
M&BWB
yeah, I suppose that thrusts are very important from the bind; I would point out that this could be considered a grappling action since it is "wrestling with the sword". I guess we were mainly talking about striking into the bind (which would make since because MnB has very little representation of the bind. There is certainly no striking or thrusting from the bind)
 

AWdeV

Duke
M&BWB
A big crossbow would be too heavy to aim with one hand and a small one could be impractically weak but definitely a ***** to reload if you had a crossbow in each hand.
 
AWdeV said:
A big crossbow would be too heavy to aim with one hand and a small one could be impractically weak but definitely a ***** to reload if you had a crossbow in each hand.

I'm pretty sure it's a joke.

Or at least I hope so.
 

Tsukana

Sergeant
Kaampper said:
try keeping 2 longswords mate :wink:  their basicly 2 handed weapons so, when your not hercules, believe me, that wont work xd

Tested. Broken. Move on.

It's not REALLY a quesiton of stamina, or reflexes. or what have you.

It's more a question of practicality (training, risk of ranged weapons, multiple opponents, even the risk against a armed man with a shield.)

All very valid.

Edit: Afterthought- It's also a question of practicality insofar as the engine/scripting changes, if it would...I guess please enough people to justify the amount of work put into it.
 

Baron Conrad

Sergeant Knight
NW
It would take a lot training to use two weapons at once, you would somehow have keep your mind on two blades at once. A shield takes a lot less thought because you just get it in the way of the other guys sword, nothing complicated.
 
Gaunt said:
A shield takes a lot less thought because you just get it in the way of the other guys sword, nothing complicated.

A sword takes a lot less thought because you just get it in the way of the other guys flesh, nothing complicated.
 

Rhade

Master Knight
Skyrage said:
None actually...if the ancient armies of the past would benefit more by having 2 weapons instead of one weapon and a shield, don't anyone here think that they would dual wield then? Not to mention add all armor on top that they'd wear and dual wielding will soon look really suicidal...

Dual wielding is fantasy/roleplaying creation mainly...in real life no sane person would go for dual wielding...oh..unless we're talking about lightsabers that actaully have next to no weight which in that case would make dual wielding somewhat meaningful...

Oh, and a samurai MIGHT have wielded dual weapons...if he didn't have any armor on him...with the war-armor on, they'd most definately be using dai-katanas...

Miyamoto Musashi, one of Japan's most legendary duelists, once defeating 100 men by himself, would ****ing disagree with you that "no sane person would go for dual wielding."

I personally don't think dual wielding would fit in Warband, but if you're going to act like an authority on the topic, be sure that you are first.

Just sayin.
 

Swadius 2.0

Grandmaster Knight
Actually, I don't think he dual wielded whenever he was in a live fight. He advocated dual wielding only in the training sense as far as I know, the main reason being if one arm is out of order your other arm still has some practice.

If you're going to give an example, be sure to check it out first. A source wouldn't be too bad either.
 
Top Bottom