>It was apparently reasonably common among Vikings, or at least among >their fictional heros, tending towards two axes or two spears. Rapier
>and main gauche was a standard fencing choice in some places.
(snip)
>Using an off-hand weapon is the better tactic, all other things being >equal. Which, considering shields start at 25% and off hand weapon at
>5%, they are quite definately not. But for those rare individuals happy >to spend the time and effort to transcend such initial limitations, two >weapon use is quite likely.
I can't recall many Vikings who regularly used 2 weapons. Egil Skallagrimson sometimes did, I think, and maybe one other. They generally preferred the protection of a shield.
In a way, it doesn't really matter how good or bad it is to use 2 weapons in the real world. Our combats are taking place in the rules world. Real world 2 weapon styles have attack patterns which bring one back to a guard position, ready to block or parry. You can effectively attack _and_ parry with each weapon in the same round. Rules world only gives us two actions: attack and attack, attack and parry, parry and parry.
The rules abstract 12 seconds of fighting into 1 good blow. They assume footwork, feints, and multiple attacks in that 12 seconds. The net result is all we care about, the 1 good blow. But 2 weapon work puts much more emphasis on the techniques and tactics - the stuff that's just assumed. We can't simulate this with the rules we have, and I think any rules that did simulate it would be too complicated to be playable. Besides, can you allow 2 attacks and a parry to one PC, and not to all the others?
Ed Tonry
Powered by hypermail