duel weilding?

[Gafgarion]

Katanas werent made to pierce armor, because in Feudal Japan they didnt wear armor. From my understanding, samurai were pretty speedy fighters, if you've ever seen a Kendo demonstation, they usually dont last very long. Well if you have a speed defeciency, your a deadman.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Samurai did NOT weild 2 katanas, it was a short wazikasi(?) and the longer bladed katana.

[NinjaGriffon]

I love Zonorhc with his terminology and such, he owns all with his superior logic!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I bow to your superiority Zonorhc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, duel wielding would be impractical in most senses. The only thing I could see it working for is daggers, anything else would be too heavy to use effectively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And I believe, Gafgarion, in fuedal Japan they did wear armor, just lighter armor that allowed for better movement. Also that the samurai did not use the katana and wakisashi at the same time. The wakisashi was a companion blade that the samurai used outside of battle and a backup/alternative to using the katana.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry if anything is wrong in my samurai knowledge.

[thepo1]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Suspension of disbelief is needed if you want to have fun with a game. If you can't reasonably assume that something would be able to exist, like dragons and magic in a fantasy world, then you can't honestly expect to have much fun. If you had weapons that didn't make sense, like a sword that looked like a shovel, then nobody's going to find it credible enough to use. It'd be plain stupid.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lol agreed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i love zonorhc as well lol

[thepo1]

i only scanned thro this to much writing so dont be hating

[Gafgarion]

I love Zonorhc with his terminology and such, he owns all with his superior logic!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I bow to your superiority Zonorhc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, duel wielding would be impractical in most senses. The only thing I could see it working for is daggers, anything else would be too heavy to use effectively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And I believe, Gafgarion, in fuedal Japan they did wear armor, just lighter armor that allowed for better movement. Also that the samurai did not use the katana and wakisashi at the same time. The wakisashi was a companion blade that the samurai used outside of battle and a backup/alternative to using the katana.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry if anything is wrong in my samurai knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In some situations they were used together

[Zonorhc]

 

I love Zonorhc with his terminology and such, he owns all with his superior logic!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I bow to your superiority Zonorhc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, duel wielding would be impractical in most senses. The only thing I could see it working for is daggers, anything else would be too heavy to use effectively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And I believe, Gafgarion, in fuedal Japan they did wear armor, just lighter armor that allowed for better movement. Also that the samurai did not use the katana and wakisashi at the same time. The wakisashi was a companion blade that the samurai used outside of battle and a backup/alternative to using the katana.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry if anything is wrong in my samurai knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In some situations they were used together

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Only after Miyamoto Musashi passed down his niten ryu. Katana and wakizashi is a fair sort of dual-wielding technique, but is geared as most katana styles are towards quick offense against a lightly-armoured opponent. You wouldn't use it against someone in plate mail, because that's not what they were indoctrinated to fight against. Had the Japanese or other dual-wielding peoples been accustomed to fighting men in plate armour, they would have gone instead for blunt weapons or heavier, two-handed blades.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The wakizashi was more of a ceremonial blade. Samurai slept with them. If dining or otherwise in the presence of a lord, however, the samurai would leave his wakizashi along with his katana at the door. Besides that, the wakizashi is carried everywhere. Hell, you commited sepukku with it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Firelord: You implied with your post that people were going to argue that you should be able to dual-wield bows. Try to come up with an argument against that. It's the bare truth. And you really should do something about your sig, because I'm just about the friendliest person you'll find to comment on it if you put me next to an irate mod who doesn't like the boards being stretched unnecessarily.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Junkieman: You missed my whole point about suspension of disbelief. It is realistic to cast spells, fight monsters, use esoteric 'skills' and the lot, because they don't actually exist in the real world, hence they are as realistic as they can get in a fantasy setting. Things which DO exist in the real world, however, have to have the proper amount of attention to detail paid to them, because people CAN say things like, "Hang on, why does a mace deal slashing damage?" or "Hey, why is this trout stronger than a bloody great claymore?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ergo, it's fine for JAGeX to mess around with things that don't actually exist, since it's a fantasy setting and they can invent what they like. Tampering with real-life things, however, is something that is Not Done by creators of said fantasy settings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now, onto the shields again. No. Using two won't protect you any better than using one. Mobility is essential to shield use, unless you are in formation. Which you aren't. With two, your mobility is restricted in much the same way as using two blades - you can't co-ordinate your arms as easily, and as an added bonus, shields are bulky. And heavy. Using two, you'll more often than not end up banging them against each other trying to move them around to block or deflect, the latter of which is what you'd want to do most often unless you want to end up with a broken arm as well as a dented shield. Holding them still isn't an option since then you're leaving everything that isn't covered by a shield (which, if you're employing two for best effect, ie. facing your enemy front-on, is going to be quite a lot, such as everything above your chest and everything below your knees) open to something nasty, like a damn huge falchion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Using one shield with a weapon, you'll be presenting your enemy with a smaller profile since you're coming at him shield-first, which means you can move it to cover the ENTIRE side that you're presenting him with, while you hold your sword back. He tries to put a flick over and around your shield, you sweep up and to the right to force his sword-arm left while you either thrust under your shield arm with your sword or act like a good warrior and fight dirty, and push forward and ram your elbow - or better yet, your shield's edge - into his nose. With two shields, you have to move towards him facing him. Going in one side first like a sword/shield combatant makes your other shield useless, which defeats the purpose of using two to begin with. Going at him front presented, you're forced to lock your shields to cover your biggest target - your torso. That leaves your head and legs unable to be protected.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sure, you can carry two full-length toe-to-chin tower shields, but then you're walking around essentially blind to everything below neck level, and as soon as someone's smart enough to bull-rush you to the ground (which, believe me, is bloody easy if all you're showing him is a pair of wooden walls backed up by only so much muscle), you're dead.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And as for "dumping on other peoples' ideas" and "sounding bitter", well, let me break it to you. This is a discussion board as well as a suggestion board. That doesn't mean that you blindly agree or contribute to every idea without any thought for why it should be implemented, and, in the case of real-life concepts like this, how it would even work in a hypothetical real-life setting. You don't just approve of things on this board because it "sounds cool".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have found that arguing against ideas gives everyone else on the board an opportunity to examine the concepts behind them, rather than, in their ignorance, blindly agreeing to everything. I am, in effect, helping the bloody discussion of the idea rather than letting it degenerate into "ya ok kewl jegex shud put dis in" and "omg it wud b kewl if u add dis..." or any other equivalent statements in varying degrees of linguistic and intellectual integrity.

[Elemental]

I think that you should be able to dual wield only light sword class weapons, hatchets and daggers.

 

 

 

Means, you can't wield 2 scimmies or short swords or anything..

 

 

 

Just, for example, scimmy and dagger, short sword + dagger, dagger + dagger, hatchet + dagger...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That wouldn't cause so much harm and the maniac dual wielders, who are obsessed with this idea

 

 

 

would be happy...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My thoughts...

 

 

 

Rest In Peace everyone...