| Author |
Message |
Adrenaline
Title: Local Canadian!
Joined: Jun 18 2007
Location: Nova Scotia, Canadiana
Posts: 365
|
Id have to go with sword and board as well but Im also a huge fan of the two handed sword, Bow and arrow and dual wield daggers for sure, quicker than anything, I suppose you'd have to be extremely agile for it to be effective though.
|
|
|
  |
|
|
Pandajuice
Title: The Power of Grayskull
Joined: Oct 30 2008
Location: US and UK
Posts: 2649
|
I'd go with a pole axe. It's versatility is king which is quite valuable when fighting other knights. It can spear, cleave, pull and rip, pierce armor, and just plain bash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Strangelove
Joined: Dec 30 2010
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 104
|
| Dr. Jeebus wrote: |
| Why isn't dual wielding an option? ... and I much prefer two blades to one. |
I think there is a reason why art from the middle and ancient ages never had anyone with two swords. It's not like they just never thought of it. More control and strength behind one sword>>flailing around inneffectively with two.
I would totes use a polearm or halberd, provided i was with a bunch of friends with polearms or halberds
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beach Bum
Joined: Dec 08 2010
Location: At the pants party.
Posts: 1777
|
| Dr. Strangelove wrote: |
| Dr. Jeebus wrote: |
| Why isn't dual wielding an option? ... and I much prefer two blades to one. |
I think there is a reason why art from the middle and ancient ages never had anyone with two swords. It's not like they just never thought of it. More control and strength behind one sword>>flailing around inneffectively with two.
I would totes use a polearm or halberd, provided i was with a bunch of friends with polearms or halberds |
I doubt that anyone would attempt to dual wield with two swords, because it would be difficult to maintain balance. I imagine dual wielding would be a sword and some sort of parrying dagger or other relatively short weapon like that so you didn't get thrown off balance and would be able to react quickly, both in defense and when you saw a hole in your opponent's defense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Strangelove
Joined: Dec 30 2010
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 104
|
| Beach Bum wrote: |
| Dr. Strangelove wrote: |
| Dr. Jeebus wrote: |
| Why isn't dual wielding an option? ... and I much prefer two blades to one. |
I think there is a reason why art from the middle and ancient ages never had anyone with two swords. It's not like they just never thought of it. More control and strength behind one sword>>flailing around inneffectively with two.
I would totes use a polearm or halberd, provided i was with a bunch of friends with polearms or halberds |
I doubt that anyone would attempt to dual wield with two swords, because it would be difficult to maintain balance. I imagine dual wielding would be a sword and some sort of parrying dagger or other relatively short weapon like that so you didn't get thrown off balance and would be able to react quickly, both in defense and when you saw a hole in your opponent's defense. |
Even in that situation a shield would be more effective, as you could block more yet still hit people with it, and a dagger or shortsword would be unlikely to go through heavy armor. Disgruntled peasant rabble perhaps, but not knights
EDIT: What about a lance? Now who wouldn't love to be on the giving end of a fine cavalry charge?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Jeebus
Moderator
Title: SLF Harbinger of Death
Joined: Sep 03 2005
Location: Wakefield, MA
Posts: 5228
|
Beach Bum had it correct, sword and dagger. Yes, a shield is more effective for blocking, but a dagger is more effective offensively, is extremely fast, and is workable at extremely close ranger when a sword thrust is hard enough to maneuver quickly.
|
 dr.jeebus.sydlexia.com - Updated sometimes, but on hiatus!
| UsaSatsui wrote: |
| The three greatest heels in history...Andy Kaufman, Triple H, and Dr. Jeebus |
|
|
   |
|
|
Black Zarak
Title: Big Coffin Hunter
Joined: Feb 01 2006
Location: Phyrexia
Posts: 4098
|
Scythe. Or maybe a gurkha.
|
REVIEWS, LEGOS, NONSENSE Check out Zarak's Barracks!
"Let that be a lesson to you, your family and everyone you've ever known..."
"Thanks to denial, I'm immortal!" |
|
 |
|
|
Lady_Satine
Title: Head of Lexian R&D
Joined: Oct 15 2005
Location: Metro area, Georgia
Posts: 7287
|
| Black Zarak wrote: |
| Scythe. Or maybe a gurkha. |
Look into the falcata.
|
"Life is a waste of time. Time is a waste of life. Get wasted all the time, and you'll have the time of your life!" |
|
|
|
|
GPFontaine
Joined: Dec 06 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 11244
|
| Dr. Jeebus wrote: |
| Why isn't dual wielding an option? I would choose bow and arrow so I could kill people from range, but you still need a sword for close combat, and I much prefer two blades to one. |
The broadsword and Bow & Arrow should go together. Look at the image shown.
Personally I would be looking for a strong blade that I could handle with one or two hands and could defend as easily as I could attack with.
So I would have to choose the broad sword out of this grouping. However, I'd be wishing it were a katana the whole time.
One other thing, have you ever seen a pole weapon used by a trained fighter? They have no problem with short range. Adding a spear to it might make it harder at close range though... but it is really a skill issue.
I also agree with Jeebus that I would want something in my off hand. Either a small shield, a heavy gauntlet, or a light weapon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
