Etwo: the new combat technique on the block!

[Carnage]

All right, this is something I really want to see put in. An etwo skill. Works like dual wield, except it's based on just using one weapon, etwoed.

Frankly, it makes a lot of sense. There's a huge gap between shields and dual wield. Second, it adds a whole new style. I'd like to see it as a middleground between shield use and dual wield. Better chance to parry and slightly higher damage, at the risk of less attacks and a higher possibility of breakage.

I think it could easily add a slew of depth to the game. If your noble fancies himself as a swordsman, he has two choices: dual wield or shield use. Shield use is almost positively out of the question. A shield is crude, and who wants to lug the thing around? Dual wielding? Only barbarians use two weapons, since they need to get in as many attacks as possible! The two-handed tactic is the gentlemen's way: precise attacks with a cold, calculating elegance.

[Pale Horse]

eh...Carnage?  Look over the help files just a little bit more closely...this skill IS in the game...

[Carnage]

ETWO                                                            (Equipment)

  This command will cause your character to wield a weapon or hold an
object in both hands. It is the default for two-handed weapons.
  Weapons held in both hands are more likely to parry and the added
strength applied will allow your character to hit opponents more often and
cause more damage (this may be a hazard, as excessive damage tends to
break weapons). Also, heavier weapons than your character can use can only
usually be used with etwo. It is inferior, however, to single-handed
wielding in that no other weapon and no shield may be employed.

Syntax:
  etwo <object>

Example:
  > etwo sword

See also:
  draw, ep, es, remove, rp, rs

The command is in game, but I don't believe there's a hardcoded skill in place, unless it's hidden.

[Pale Horse]

Ah, you ment it as a hard coded skill....My misunderstanding.  Perhapse I should reread the posts before replying to them.

But if we have an etwo skill, we'll have to have an ep skill. Dual-wield is a skill because even if you have training, it's still hard to fight with two weapons. Two handed is the way some weapons are meant to be used, and the training in slashing_weapons or whatever would reflect that. Dual-wielding sucks in my opinion. It's just a self-perpetuating fad, just like clubs and hammers were a year or so back. Well, that's from my experience with a dual-wielder and a etwoer.

[Gorobei]

Etwo is great.  I love two-handed weapons, and I haven't ever felt like I was being jacked.
It might suck if you were etwoing a regular weapon that's designed for one hand.  You would be stronger with your single weapon, but look at all those people, getting so many attacks!
If, however, you get a weapon that's meant for two hands (halberd, lotilus, bladed staff... drool) then each of your attacks does just about twice as much damage as each of an etwoer's, if not more.  Plus, with a single weapon in two hands, you get bonuses to your hit ratio and your parry skill (compared to a single weapon in one hand).  You get to throw out some kick-ass emotes, too.

[creeper386]

I don't think I've ever etwo-d a weapon in game... But of it just goes off of weapon skill completely, I'd like to see a bonus for weapons normally used in one weapon, and I'm going to give at least one reason why.

It's VERY common with longswords, even shortswords and anything bigger to use both hands when fighting. Now, I don't think etwoing a weapon means you always have both hands on the weapon, but your switching between hands, and using both hands. You'd be able to move the weapon quicker and more precise. As well as at times having a bonus to damage done. This is my one reason.

One good movie to watch is going to be 'First Knight'. It's the only one I can think of, and I think 'A Knight's Tale' would probably be good but I haven't seen it. In medieval times using two weapons all the time in combat was pretty rare and normally was used when surprising an opponent with a knife or something you had stowed away(Example of this in 'First Knight' towards the end in the fight between the good guy and the bad guy), and when shields tended to be bigger and more for mounted combat or in group combat, using one weapon was extremely common because it gave you alot more movement possibilities with your body and weapon, along with having the benefit of a free hand to add into a heavy swing now and then.

Now, maybe the code takes this into account already, and if it does, I don't think there should be so much a skill as just a bonus for using it. Already the larger weapons give massive bonus in terms of damage. But like I said previously I've never etwo-d a weapon in the game I don't think so I don't know the specifics.

Creeper who is now done and is wondering if that is clearer then is normal posts(He tried to follow some logical path).  :twisted:

[John]

I think 'A Knight's Tale' would probably be good

It isn't historically correct with neither technique nor how training tools were used. Very dissapointing.

if we have an etwo skill, we'll have to have an ep skill. Dual-wield is a skill because even if you have training, it's still hard to fight with two weapons.

Good point. But just because your proficient in technique with 2 swords, doesn't mean your any good with one sword (whether it be two-handed or not). And if you are proficient with 1 sword 1 hand, then that doesn't mean you'll be good with 1 sword 2 hands.

I'd like to see both additions.

I don't think etwoing a weapon means you always have both hands on the weapon, but your switching between hands, and using both hands.

My god man, you're a genius! I'd actually never thought about it that way, and now that I have, it's beautiful. That just added a lot of depth to what I now think of etwo'ing, on Arm, and in D&D. And who says creeper doesn't say anything coherant

[Xanous]

From reading your post you don't want an actual etwo skill, you want to make etwoing better.  Making it into a skill won't make etwoing more viable.  Think of rangers and the skinning skill, when that was imped a starting ranger's ability to skin went from 100% to almost nothing.

I, for one, don't see how any skill would work.  How would failing or succeeding at the etwo skill effect combat?  You can already etwo any weapon in the game and you get small damage and parry bonuses, as well as a lower strength requirement to wield it.

[John]

I, for one, don't see how any skill would work.

This is my understanding of it. If your bad at etwo (0%) and you etwo, you get a negative modifier. If your average (50%) you get no modifier. If your good (100%) you get a positive modifier.

Cons:
* Combat will be harder then now.

Pros:
* It will allow for a variety of warriors who specialise in certain techniques.

[Anonymous]

I played a Delf who only carried a single obsidian scimitar and wore it on his back, always etwoing it.

I always got a kick out of that guy, lived a good long time too...was buff...

Er, anyways, I've always thought that an etwo skill would be alright, but more than that I'd rather have etwo give a serious penalty to someone trying to disarm you.

It just seems harder to me to knock a sword/axe/club out of the hands of someone who has both mits around it.

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

My current character, while sparring, would start with dual-wielding, and then when disarmed or simply bored, would allow one of the weapons to fall to the ground and etwo the remaing one. I was a bit of a newb, but this tactic baffled (Heh, funny word) my sparring partners, and I thought I was improving both my dual-wield skill and my etwo skill. When I realized that etwo wasn't a skill, I stopped this rather cool technique, and now my character is just average dual-wielding chopping machine.  :cry: . If this would be implemented, my character could return to his former glory, in all of his glorious newbish ignorance!

(And yes, I realize that changing a character's fighting styles based on OOC discoveries is probably crappy RP. But what can I say? I'd rather -not- be impaled, thank you)

[Delirium]

Well, why not, if it adds flash and style to your character?

[Rindan]

My current character, while sparring, would start with dual-wielding, and then when disarmed or simply bored, would allow one of the weapons to fall to the ground and etwo the remaing one. I was a bit of a newb, but this tactic baffled (Heh, funny word) my sparring partners, and I thought I was improving both my dual-wield skill and my etwo skill. When I realized that etwo wasn't a skill, I stopped this rather cool technique, and now my character is just average dual-wielding chopping machine.  :cry: . If this would be implemented, my character could return to his former glory, in all of his glorious newbish ignorance!

I had a character do the exact same thing, though I didn't let the fact that it was not helping my 'etwo' skill bother me.  If you really understand the combat code, there actually is a time when it is better to etwo and keep fighting then it is to pick up your weapon and wait for a better time to make the grab for that fallen weapon.  

I think that adding a little flash to your fighting style is great.  I had a rather buffed up warrior at one point.  Generally, if he used two weapons he would pound the piss out of whomever he was fighting, and pounding the piss out of someone is generally a poor way to teach them.  So, when breaking in someone new, I had a little routine, especially if I was not sure of their abilities.  I should also mention that the character was rather vain about his abilities, so he always liked to make a good showing, even when trying not to kick too much ass.  

I would start out by duel wielding.  This normally resulted in pounding the life out of my victim, so I would quickly toss away one club.  Stylistically, my character would toss away the club, sort of making the suggestion that he didn't need.  It is like entering a battle, realizing your opponent is much worse then you, then to taunt them throw down your shield.  At that point I would etwo.  If the beating continued, I would drop my club into an ep, and finally if I was still pounding the life out of them, I would es.

I found that this sort of style of fighting was one of the more enjoyable ways RP wise, simply because there was a lot of neat images you could create with emotes.  Start the fight, pound the guy, chuckle and mockingly throw away one weapon and take it with two hands.  Keep beating the guy up, and drop down to just one hand.  Finally, after another skillful parry toss your single remaining weapon into your off hand, then finish the guy off, adding insult to injury.    More fun still can be had if you are fighting someone, disarm them, and just to prove you are sporting toss away one of your own weapons.

I took this pretty far off topic, didn't I?

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

Yeah, you did Rindan. And I do that too (The fighting thing, not the off topic thing), minus the etwo and fist fighting step. My point was that etwo would free up more options for combat, if you made it equal with other skills. Technically, it is fairly equal (A half-giant etwoing an obsidian scimitar is a terrifying image, I'd bet) but I feel a skill would encourage people to form more unique brands of fighting. As for that other style, keeping one hand free while fighting, I do that on occasion, and it may or may not be a good idea for a skill... Not quite sure yet. Just my opinion. See ya.

[Carnage]

In a sense, I envision etwo to be a more defensive style. Since you have slowed attacks, I see it as luring your opponent in, then making a hard, calculated counter-attack when they leave themselves open for it.

On the flip side of the coin, I see dual wield as basically flailing your arms and hoping you actually scrape the guy. Not too elegant, but when you get good you can look like you know what you're doing.

As for shields, I mostly see it as tucked behind your shield, then moving it out of the way and attacking, then hiding behind it again. Combat-wise, they're great, but you have to lug around this big hunk of wood or chitin or whatever.

I think there really needs to be something to bridge the gap between the skills, and add some more versatility to the game. Right now in a fight, an etwoer facing off against a dual wielder will get obliterated. Why? If I spend my life learning how to use a sword a certain way, I should be able to adequately defend and attack with it.

To add onto that, axes were weapons often used with two hands. Why? By moving your wrists, you can eliminate the momentum and get in a great number of attacks. Four in two seconds, actually. They were also used as a great demoralizer. Against a sword and shield-wielding opponent, the axe-user would purposely hit the shield. While it only made the shield-user's arm slightly sore after each hit, it had a great demoralizing effect upon the enemies.

In my opinion, and that of a good majority as the polls have shown, it would benefit the MUD if the skill were implemented. While not an unbalancing or a new, super-creative idea, it allows more creativity on the part of the player, rather than falling victim to thee same old two schools of combat that run rampant through the game: dual wield and shield use.

[Delirium]

On the flip side of the coin, I see dual wield as basically flailing your arms and hoping you actually scrape the guy. Not too elegant, but when you get good you can look like you know what you're doing.

Actually, I envision a dual-wielder as being quite elegant once they get good. Naturally when they start out, it'll be awkward and their movements will be slower and clumsier as they get used to coordinating their movements - feinting with one, striking with the other, combining the two together in a harmonious fashion.

Such styles tend to be very beautiful to watch, possessing a certain deadly elegance to them as the two weapons weave an intricate and deceptive pattern around and into an opponent.

That's for two matched weapons, though I imagine any fighting style has its own flairs, whether dual wielding a large and small, etwo'ing, using a shield, or single-wielding.

Basic point being, dual-wielding would take an incredible amount of hand-eye coordination and grace to use effectively, so if you're good at it, it's got to be quite the elegant and deadly show. That in itself is probably what attracts a lot of people to dual-wielding. Quick and agile, versus being slow and strong (shield user). Though codewise, I think you attack faster when using one weapon than two. So it balances out.

As far as etwo'ing a spear, bladed staff, etc, it would be nice if a slight bonus to parrying was given, but I'm not too incredibly worried about it. I think it'd be fun to emote out a style like that.

Although I do have to admit that Gith probably won't be too impressed with your emoting ability.

[Dan]

There are skills that you have to branch that aid in wielding certain weapons in both hands. All I will say.

[X-D]

[/quote]Carnage wrote:

On the flip side of the coin, I see dual wield as basically flailing your arms and hoping you actually scrape the guy. Not too elegant, but when you get good you can look like you know what you're doing.



Actually, I envision a dual-wielder as being quite elegant once they get good. Naturally when they start out, it'll be awkward and their movements will be slower and clumsier as they get used to coordinating their movements - feinting with one, striking with the other, combining the two together in a harmonious fashion.

Dual weapon fighting is known as florintine (probly spelled wrong) here on earth, probobly the most elegant of styles, quite a few fencing styles were of a florentine nature, rapier,epee and foil were commonly used with the Main-gauche as a secondary weapon to block, parry and stab.

Flailing about is more common in the two-handed weapon styles actually, as your aim is to just be swinging too damm hard for it to be parried and if someone tries they are likley to have half a weapon, be off balance or missing a limb

But then again, a weapon that is 6' of steel weighing 40+ lbs being swung by some 300lbs guy does not need any style other then large powerful swings since whatever it connects with becomes parts, possibly cleaving a person in half, armor and all.

[X-D]

Wow, That got messed up, ^Well, the part inside the quote box is what I had to say, the part outside| is the quote, chuckle

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

Dual wielding isn't clumbsy or improbable. In fact, it was the favored figthing style of the Vikings, and those that could fight two handed were considered invaluable warriors. They even had an expression "he is a two-handed man" or some such, meaning that he was particularly resourceful and quick.

Of course, the Vikings didn't neccasarily use one weapon in each hand. Sometimes they fought with one weapon, and one weapon only, and would switch it from hand to hand during combat. The particularly skilled could use one weapon in each hand, toss them back and forth, and throw hand axes and the like without missing a beat.

That, my friends, is why Vikings were so damn scary.

And although I don't have any quotes or fancy websites to back it up, I'm pretty sure that's accurate (Eaters of the Dead by Michael Crichton, it's a damn good book, and you get a good, historical, unbiased look at the Norsemen). Anyways, my point is that both dual-wielding and eping are favorable combat techniques. Speed and such from dual-wielding, balance and flexibility while eping (And yes, I do now realize that I haven't yet mentioned etwoing, the topic of this thread. I'm such a compulsive typer). Anyways, don't poo-poo dual-wielding! And on second thought, I'd consider some sort of one handed fighting skill, just so not everyone feels they have to pick up either another axe or a shield. But I'm still not sure on that... Choices are good, but we need to make sure it doesn't get too confusing, you know?

[Lazloth]

I don't fully see what an etwo skill would do for Arm.  Don't the [albeit hidden] measures of 'offense' and 'defense' already provide enough flexibility for variance with how a given fighter chooses to dress (in terms of arms)?

I guess your problem is that if you opt to neither incorporate a secondary weapon (to queue dual wield) or a shield (shield use), you're benefitting nothing from auxiliary code?

I personally think this whole line of thinking is extremely superfluous.

[Angela Christine]

I don't fully see what an etwo skill would do for Arm.  Don't the [albeit hidden] measures of 'offense' and 'defense' already provide enough flexibility for variance with how a given fighter chooses to dress (in terms of arms)?

I guess your problem is that if you opt to neither incorporate a secondary weapon (to queue dual wield) or a shield (shield use), you're benefitting nothing from auxiliary code?

I personally think this whole line of thinking is extremely superfluous.

I think the perception is that the Dual Wield skill is added to your offense and defense when you are dual wielding, but nothing is added when you are not dual wielding, so your ability to kill things is lowered if you don't use the Dual Wield skill bonus.  Everybody gets the dual weild skill and the shield use skill.  When you use a second weapon or a shield you get the benefit of those skills.  When you use just a single weapon, etwoed or not, there is no particular skill giving you a bonus.  I suspect that there probably are some coded in differences, in AD&D 2nd ed. using two weapons gave you the chance to hit twice, but made you less likely to hit with your primary weapon than if you had just one weapon, because the second weapon is a distraction and splits your focus.

There is also the perception that you should try to use every skill on your skill list.  Why?  Because even if that skill isn't important to you, something important might branch from it.  You might prefer to use one weapon, but if you believe Parry, Dodge, Bash, or DragonBreath branch from dual wield or shield use, then you might dual weild because you think it's the only way to get those other skills.  They may be mistaken, but I think it is natural to want to use the skills you have.

AC

[Carnage]

To address several points---

On dual wielding
I looked around, couldn't find anything on vikings dual-wielding or real-life dual wielding. However, I only searched around on yahoo and google for about an hour, and had to wade through a bunch of crap spilling over from EverQuest and other MUDs, along with using a variety of terms.

I don't see using two swords as being the least bit practical. There's too much weight in both hands, and unless you've really spent years mastering it, I don't think it's going to come out to be the artful and elegant blade dance we all envision it to be.

However, I can see something like a sword and dagger being realistic, with the dagger in the offhand and used for either parrying or for when you get close. I'd never expect to see soldiers in an enormous army all using that type of combat, however. Maybe in duels, but never wide-spread.

Blunts I don't have a problem dual-wielding. They don't take as much concentration as swords, and you just need to focus on really hitting the other person. When I say blunts, I mean along the lines of a pipe or a club.

I'm not going to touch axes nor warhammers, because I've never really felt their weights. But I think that dual wield is effective with some weapons, but not necessarily always some flowery, beautiful and intricate dance. Someone might not smoothly duck down to avoid a blow. They might jerk away at the last second. They're not always going to nimbly leap pack or perfectly parry that strike. They're most likely stumbling back and barely deflecting the blow. We're getting fiction and romanticism caught up in the reality of it all. I think we've all seen a REAL fist fight, where two people are trying to beat the crap out of each other. It's not the same thing as in the movies.  It's brutal, clothes are unceremoniously torn, and the injures are ugly. If there's a sword flying at my face, I'm not going to be too worried about looking good. I'm most likely going to lean back and stumble away, not dexterously shift my weight from one foot and leap back.

Combat is harsh. Beauty isn't a concern. This's a desert world, where there's no room for for flowers, planning ahead, and thinking about what's best for yourself and everyone.

Lazloth
No, they don't provide enough flexibility. As is, you're at a serious disadvantage if you already don't dual wield or use a shield. Using two hands on a weapon is extremely practical. In a place where most people are piss poor, I'd think most would likely invest in a single weapon and learn to effectively use that, rather than spending their entire lives forcing their second hand to be as good as the second.

What will it do for Arm? Give it some variation and more realism. I'd assume as the skill progressed that you would be more adequately able to defend yourself with one single weapon, and have a better chance of hitting the person.

No, it's not 'needed', per say, but neither are a lot of things in the game. It's a treat that will improve it and allow different ways to play your styles.

[Lazloth]

Carnage:

Correct me if I'm wrong--

You type skills.
You see shield use and dual wielding.
You feel slighted in that you are using a two-handed weapon, as neither of these skills (and the ensuing combat modifications) are utilized.

What I am saying is that:

The code is undeniably robust enough to understand that you are using a weapon two-handed.  The code is undoubtedly intelligent enough to assign bonuses (let's say to damage) and penalties (let's say to your defense) based on that fact.  This is above and beyond the fact that the diceroll on a two-handed weapon is generally going to be higher than your one-handed variety (yes, setting aside that you may in fact be etwo'ing a one-hander).

Based on the above, you have an advantage in etwo'ing (assuming you are not a combat veteran), as your fictitious skill-level in the ability is not queried as it would be if you were using a shield or an off-hand weapon.

[EDIT]:  About the only thing I'd offer is that if you're etwoing it should be much more difficult for you to be disarmed, if such is not already in place.

[DrunkenSalarr]

I looked around, couldn't find anything on vikings dual-wielding or real-life dual wielding.

Ever hear of fencing? or many of the other French styles of swordplay?  The point is two wield two light weapons in each hand. I'll admit, wielding a greatsword in each hand is only realistic if you're a half-giant.  

Fine Sources for various forms of combat:

http://www.musketeer.org/manuals/diGrassi/contents.htm
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~wew/fencing.html
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Medieval/miscellany_pdf/Other_Articles_VIII.pdf[/list]

[creeper386]

The problem is... You get better at dual wielding, or you get better at shield use, ALONG WITH getting better at using a weapon. If your using ONE weapon, EPed or ETWOed your only getting better at using that weapon. You don't have the benefit of another skill giving in bonuses, and it certainly DOES effect things.

If it didn't, why so often do you see skilled people during training stop using their normal dual wielding to use one weapon? So not to beat the living crap out of the unskilled person they are training. The only problem with fixing this well give no way for people skilled all about in combat to not beat the living crap out of someone they are training.

BUT, to try and say using a weapon and shield, or using two weapons is more practical, and more common it's obviously not true. And even though people who think even a six foot sword is going to weigh that much might be alittle off(Real swords acctually don't weigh that much, there is a BIG misconception due to ceremonial swords and swords not meant for battle being made today that aren't acctually replicas of real swords. Go look at a website that sells swords meant for a fight, a normal longsword should be about 4-5 pounds if I am remembering correctly) it's still extremely difficult to keep two longer weapons moving together, and more often in general melee, a shield well get in the way more often then not. Another misconception that using two hands on a weapon means your going slower, or your AUTOMATICALLY swinging some massive over hand strokes that if you miss your going to be falling to the ground. You do get the benefit of some added strength into swings, but if you swing as hard as you can, your likely to miss and be dead when trying to pull your sword out of the ground/post/wall/anything else. Go pick up a real sword meant for combat. It won't be that heavy, BUT it's still alot easier to move about when keeping both hands open, doesn't mean always on the hilt, just in place to help the other hand.

Creeper

[DrunkenSalarr]

My Weapon of Choice (IRL, not game) is a two handed weapon. It also happens to be one of the heaviest blades out there.  Once again creeper was right. My weapon of choice only weighs 5-7lbs, but that can get very heavy, really fast.

The Wild Highlanders (my favorite smiths) do traditional bladesmithing.  All their weapons are battle ready, and they keep extensive documentation on what they do.  Here is their blurb about my WoC:

Claidheamh Da Laihm
OTHER NAMES:The Great Sword or Two-Handed Broad Sword
LENGTH: 48 to 73 inches
WEIGHT: 5-7 pounds<br>
DESCRIPTION:
Pronounced Claid Da Lav Mor in Gaelic and means "Great Two Handed Sword." This weapon was Sir William Wallace's favorite.  It was just over 6 ft long and weighted more than 7 lbs. A blow from one of these swords would cut a man in half.

The true highland cla-d'lav has a forward sweeping quillian, with tips pointing toward the of the blade making it easier to wield and keep the opponents blade away from the hands and arms. This large and heavy weapon takes much strength and agility to wield properly. Sizes vary dependent on the height of highlander, measuring from the ground to the top of the sternum.

This and other great documention can be found at //www.wildhighlanders.com

Drunken Salarr, who can actually use this weapon well.

[Carnage]

Ever hear of fencing? or many of the other French styles of swordplay? The point is two wield two light weapons in each hand.

I asked the French about it, but they surrendered and ran away.

Anyway, I'm not really convinced much on the topic of dual-wielding and I'm not looking to argue about it or be convinced either way. I'm not forcing my beliefs on anyone else, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't derail the thread that's about etwo onto some spree about how likely dual wield is. I stated that was how I saw dual wield. If you don't like it, tough shit.

Moving on, Creeper brought up some good things to attention. Excellent job, Crepper.

[Lazloth]

Moving on, Creeper brought up some good things to attention. Excellent job, Crepper.

I'm not flaming, but you have got to be kidding me.

Perhaps you gain the weapon-skill slower if you are using Shield-use or Dual-wield. That's at least what I've noticed as far as Dual-Wield vs. Etwo, My Dual-wielder that lost a weapon and etwo'd the one he had left, was much worse using just the one weapon, not because Dual-wield gives bonuses to attack, but because I wasn't as good with the weapon. Ermmm... okay, I'll try to put it in statistical terms (Keep in mind, these are just my observations, and why I think the game is Okay without an etwo skill)

Okay, you have a dual-wielder, an etwo'er and a shielder. Here are their stat percentages. Assume same playing time, training time etc.

           Dual-Wield   | Shield-use   |  Weapon-of-choice
DWer          50%      |       0%       |       40%
ETWOer       0%       |       0%        |      75%
SHIELDer     0%       |       55%      |      55%

Now... of course take these numbers with a grain of salt... it's just to illustrate a point. Now note those numbers don't add up to the same amount... well that's because Dual-wield at that level allows you to fight with each weapon (Less for offhand) at roughly the same level as if you had that one weapon in one hand, at a 40% skill in that weapon. Shield-Use at that level would provide bonuses to parry and such, and the weapon would be used at 55%. The Etwoer, having been training in -only- the weapon skill, would get much better with that weapon much quicker. They don't have to worry about the interaction of weapon and weapon or weapon and shield. So therefore they fight with a 75% skill in that weapon, offsetting the Dual-wielding of the other guy and the Shield-use of the third guy.

Jesus.... I hope that post made some kind of sense. Maybe it's better just to skip this one.

[creeper386]

Alright, first of all I'm going to warn you, that this is a REALLY long post. Also everything in here is just what I know from the reseach I know and the common link between everything I'm not in any way saying I'm absolutely right or any sort of knowledgable person when it comes to this, I'm also NOT going to respond to the little remark about people kidding. I DO acctually know what I'm talking about. If you have a 50 pound sword your fucking arm is going to fall off. End of statement, if you think otherwise, your aren't too bright or have never held a real sword.

AND just for that, I got an experiment for you if you think a sword that light couldn't possibly be tiring. Get a 3 foot piece of wood, 2 by 2 would probably work. Stick something on the end that weighs roughly a pound. Now start swinging that around. Now make another one. Get a buddy and fight with them using only one hand the whole time. See how quickly your arm plays out. now take a break, rest up. Do it again, this time use both hands, doesn't have to always be on the hilt at the same time, the second hand is there mostly for support. See how long it takes your arms to play out this time.

Now, the first part, is to show you something light when sticking out from your arm can be heavy, it may not weigh alot, but the leverage and momentem well certainly work your muscles fairly well. The second part, is to show you one of the small benefits of having a free hand and using it in conjunction with the other, on one weapon.

Now, the idea of French swordsmanship and duel wielding, yes it was done, but it wasn't two long weapons. It was done with a foil or rapier, both EXTREMELY light swords, and the off-hand weapon was normal a main-gauche(Sp? Not sure, but I beleive it has something to do with left hand, being considered as the common weak hand). Even if the off-hand weapon was something else, it was a small weapon used mainly for parrying. Stilettos were also used, but more by the lower classes because they were considered fighting dirty(The stiletto is also one of the things that made metal armour almost as useful as cloth).

Alright, got all that out of the way. Now I'm going to tell you may favoriate weapon. Well, discounting the katana, I really like that because it's very light and EXTREMELY monuverable. After that, my favoriate weapon is probably one of the most used sword in histord. The hand in a half. Also commonly called a bastard sword because it's between a longsword and a greatsword. I beleive the bastard sword was commonly about 5 feet, give to take a half foot for variant styles, and had an extended hilt which made room for using a second hand. Can be used with one hand, or two, ussually used alone with your off-hand supporting your main hand. This does wonders against momentum, giving you extra strenght in a swing as well as more control and support for parrying and blocking, but in acctuality the only difference is really it being longer because it's use in combat is much like a long sword or a greatsword(Only more off-hand or less off-hand respectively). Main difference in usage from the longsword is it was less likely to be used in conjunction with a shield(Except when mounted I beleive) and main difference from a greatsword is it wasn't completely relying upon strength or weight of the blow(Kind of the strong man's finesse weapon).

How does ALL this fit into everything... Well duel wielding two long weapons was NEVER a very common thing, and a back up dagger or knife was mostly used in surprise. So the alot of most battles was fought with one weapon(Unless your using light weight pussy weapons like the French  :twisted: ) The idea of battles being light footed, duel wielding dances of hypnotic death is mostly brought up because of fantasy stories, as is the idea that swords weigh a massive amount(Want to see things that weigh alot, try putting on a suit of armour, think the only thing in human history that was heavier and still worn was old fashion diving suits). And, although I don't think duel wield or anything else would change, I do think that at least two more weapon styles should be made into skills so they can be used as successful as duel wield, and shield use. I'm pretty sure if they were equal in there own way duel wield wouldn't be as famous as it is now, just because people like to be different sometimes unless it is truly hard to do it by code.

Creeper who has rambled enough for now, my appoligies.

[Delirium]

My point is not to say that all dual-wielding styles on Zalanthas are elegant. Many may be, especially in the North where supposedly, that sort of effect is something they strive for. However, it's not just 'flailing about' either, it can be brutal and to the point, or it can be deceptive and quick - but if you have any skill whatsoever, you're not going to be 'flailing'. If you were, you'd lose a limb or the fight pretty quickly. The only time I see that happening is when you're learning to dual wield and/or when your character loses control. I certainly was not trying to imply that your characters would duck away with perfect poise and grace each time. Watch one of my characters training (sparring) and you'd quickly see that, depending on their opponent's skill, it's quite possible they'll become off balance, try to recover themselves while clumsily attempting to bat away attacks and stumbling backwards, lashing out wildly, etc. Never did I mean to imply that your characters are automatically perfect, beautifully elegant combat machines.

.. Well, I went off on a tangent there.

Anyway, another point you all might have forgotten to remember is that while us Earthlings are (in general) only capable of dual-wielding two light weapons - which still takes an incredible amount of hand-eye coordination and skill - these are Zalanthan people we're talking about. In general, they are stronger, faster, hardier, more agile and more or less, mean little bastards that would put the best of ours to shame.