Dual-Wielding coming next patch?
- Thread starter Iury
- Start date
- Joined
- 11/01/2016
- Messages
- 1,982
You have more info here: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=8448&p=24244&hilit=dual+wielding#p24212
Elldar
New Member
- Joined
- 22/08/2016
- Messages
- 91
Realism is cool and all, but this game doesn't seem to have it as a priority. Take Cruelty, for example, a two handed sword that is more akin to Buster Sword more than an actual two hander. Or minotaurs, who can't one shot you, despite how big they and their axes are.0rion79":288cfbbv said:
Besides, dual wielding was definitely a thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parrying_dagger
D&D definitely wasn't the one to introduce it.
I always thought dual wielding historically was two short easy to move weapons. Hand axes, daggers, and shortswords. The idea would be to distract your enemy with one hand and kill with other or use your offhand to block. Kind of high risk high reward fighting style.
Elldar
New Member
- Joined
- 22/08/2016
- Messages
- 91
Mostly off-hand weapon wasn't identical to the weapon in the main hand, I think, so the actual dual wielding wouldn't be all that prominent.
Orion has a point though, in that it wasn't all that effective. To my knowledge, such a technique was mostly used by fencers, and not on the actual battlefield. A parrying dagger is as good as it's namesake - it's for parrying and an occasional stab.
Using an off-hand weapon on a battlefield is just too risky, with arrows flying at you, facing several opponents and whatnot. Much safer to just opt for a shield(which can bash skulls, as well) or a two handed weapon.
Orion has a point though, in that it wasn't all that effective. To my knowledge, such a technique was mostly used by fencers, and not on the actual battlefield. A parrying dagger is as good as it's namesake - it's for parrying and an occasional stab.
Using an off-hand weapon on a battlefield is just too risky, with arrows flying at you, facing several opponents and whatnot. Much safer to just opt for a shield(which can bash skulls, as well) or a two handed weapon.
0rion79
Member
- Joined
- 22/12/2016
- Messages
- 441
Yep, Elldar made the point.
I know that this game is a fantasy one, yet two-weapons fighting is such an abused option that I would prefer NOT to see it here.
For the records, using two longswords to fight is something that required a lot of practice and coordination and there are very few historical records about that, so there was some person who did, but that did happen mostly in civilian fights (every day life where you had to defend against brigands or an attack in a city). In those circumstances, swords where excellent weapons to carry around because they are not as cumbersome as axes or polearms as spears, so it was possible to carry even 2 at once. But just image swinging blows with 2 longswords or 2 rapiers: you risk to hit your own weapon in the process and overall maneuverability is reduced.
Also, it is not possible to fight effectively with any kind of weapon, such as axes and maces: they are heavy, they affect your balance so you can do that only with light weapons and again it is barely effective only in a civilian fight.
It was more typical to wear a dagger or a short blade used as Elldar has described already, but wearing a shield or a two-handed sword is actually much more effective.
Remember that medieval weapons where like the old scissor-paper-rock game: nothing absolutely better than something else, but mostly based on the context and who you have to fight.
I know that this game is a fantasy one, yet two-weapons fighting is such an abused option that I would prefer NOT to see it here.
For the records, using two longswords to fight is something that required a lot of practice and coordination and there are very few historical records about that, so there was some person who did, but that did happen mostly in civilian fights (every day life where you had to defend against brigands or an attack in a city). In those circumstances, swords where excellent weapons to carry around because they are not as cumbersome as axes or polearms as spears, so it was possible to carry even 2 at once. But just image swinging blows with 2 longswords or 2 rapiers: you risk to hit your own weapon in the process and overall maneuverability is reduced.
Also, it is not possible to fight effectively with any kind of weapon, such as axes and maces: they are heavy, they affect your balance so you can do that only with light weapons and again it is barely effective only in a civilian fight.
It was more typical to wear a dagger or a short blade used as Elldar has described already, but wearing a shield or a two-handed sword is actually much more effective.
Remember that medieval weapons where like the old scissor-paper-rock game: nothing absolutely better than something else, but mostly based on the context and who you have to fight.