DnD 3.5 no-magic setting, lvl 1
- Thread starter Myth and Legend
- Start date
Padreigh
First Post
I am not discussing history when away from my books, I am too much of a coward for that. 
I think it was just an example you mentioned earlier in this thread regarding greatswords and -axes for Germans and Britons.
For chainmail I could offer this link: The army from Hjortspring - Oldtiden
And re dual-wielding I agree ... although there is the dimachaerus (if he really existed that is)
I think it was just an example you mentioned earlier in this thread regarding greatswords and -axes for Germans and Britons.
For chainmail I could offer this link: The army from Hjortspring - Oldtiden
And re dual-wielding I agree ... although there is the dimachaerus (if he really existed that is)
Padreigh
First Post
My first draft would look like this:
Decius Cornelius Sulla Minor
Human (Roman Patrician) Swashbuckler 1
STR 10 DEX 16 CON 12 INT 14 WIS 12 CHA 14
HP 11
FORT +3 REF +3 WILL +1
Weapon Finesse, Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Unarmed Strike
Bluff 4, Diplomacy 4, Tumble 4, Sense Motive 4, Balance 4, Climb 4, Swim 4
Shord Sword (XIphos or Gladius), Dagger (Parazonium or Pugio). Studded Leather Armour (cuir bolli breastplate, greaves and bracers with bronze reinforcements)
Decius Cornelius Sulla Minor
Human (Roman Patrician) Swashbuckler 1
STR 10 DEX 16 CON 12 INT 14 WIS 12 CHA 14
HP 11
FORT +3 REF +3 WILL +1
Weapon Finesse, Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Unarmed Strike
Bluff 4, Diplomacy 4, Tumble 4, Sense Motive 4, Balance 4, Climb 4, Swim 4
Shord Sword (XIphos or Gladius), Dagger (Parazonium or Pugio). Studded Leather Armour (cuir bolli breastplate, greaves and bracers with bronze reinforcements)
Myth and Legend
First Post
Looks good. So two characters in the RG so far. Who e else are we waiting on>?
Walking Dad
First Post
Hi, I'm only lurking because of the interesting concept. I would have tried to join, but I try to slowly step away from 3,5 in favor of Pathfinder. This out of the way:
To my best knowledge, Miyamoto Musashi used two-weapon fighting and katanas successfully.
Hook swords, chicken sickles, tonfas and other Asian weapons were/are also often used in pairs.
Have fun
...
If you want to argue history, any kind of dual wielding is fiction, apart from rapier and dagger which is thousands of years later.
To my best knowledge, Miyamoto Musashi used two-weapon fighting and katanas successfully.
Hook swords, chicken sickles, tonfas and other Asian weapons were/are also often used in pairs.
Have fun
To my best knowledge, Miyamoto Musashi used two-weapon fighting and katanas successfully.
Hook swords, chicken sickles, tonfas and other Asian weapons were/are also often used in pairs.
Have fun
I think it was a wakizashi/katana pair, which is similar in idea to a rapier and dagger, if I understood correctly. That aside, I think Myth meant European styles.
Myth, I am not sure who we are waiting on, but I am considering switching my class from warblade to Crusader, because I am thinking we could really use the healing... That'd be about all I'd change, so I'd just be tweaking the class and a few other little aspects... haven't decided just yet.
Myth and Legend
First Post
No problem, either concept is fine.
WD:
Needless to say a hastily carved wooden sword can't match a real weapon unless you are fighting someone with 0 skill (which was not the case as far as the story goes).
Using two equal length weapons longer then daggers in each hand is pretty much fiction yes. I believe one of the medieval masters of the sword said that in order for one to use two swords in each hand effectively, he must be as good with his off-hand as he is with his primary hand (in other words, he must be perfectly ambidextrous).
There are also modern day researchers of swordfigthing and WMAs, (ARMA for example, google them). They say that during practice sessions they have found no real advantage to wielding two equal length swords (such as longswords). They would rather be fighting with sword & buckler, sword & shield, or just with two hands (and the off-hand available for grappling).
Same with daggers - they'd rather be able to grab your ear or grapple your hand then have a second pointy thing to stab you with.
Short weapons, like the katar for example, were in fact, dual wielded. But that is a whole different style from swordfighting (it's as close to swordfighting as wielding a spear is). Just because you have bladed weapons and stab/slash with them does not mean you qualify as a swordsman.
There are great misconceptions added today by Holliwood. Like the guy grabbing a greatsword and cleaving trough plate with it. Historically, greatswords were used much like spears (that's why the bottom part of the blade is wrapped in leather) and were used primarily as thrusting weapons when fighting an armoured foe.
During ancient times a shield was actually a preferred sidearm, and while not "cool" enough for the movies, it's very very useful in battle. Think about it. In the thick of a melee, would you rather have another sword (although a single strike from a single sword is enough to end a fight. Even a graze trough the muscle on your hip for example) or a thick shield to keep the enemy pointy things from reaching you in turn?
WD:
Musashi is a historical figure but with much myth surrounding him. One tale, for example, shows how he carved a nodachi out of an oar as he was heading over for a life-or-death duel on an island. He beat his opponent with it.
Needless to say a hastily carved wooden sword can't match a real weapon unless you are fighting someone with 0 skill (which was not the case as far as the story goes).
Using two equal length weapons longer then daggers in each hand is pretty much fiction yes. I believe one of the medieval masters of the sword said that in order for one to use two swords in each hand effectively, he must be as good with his off-hand as he is with his primary hand (in other words, he must be perfectly ambidextrous).
There are also modern day researchers of swordfigthing and WMAs, (ARMA for example, google them). They say that during practice sessions they have found no real advantage to wielding two equal length swords (such as longswords). They would rather be fighting with sword & buckler, sword & shield, or just with two hands (and the off-hand available for grappling).
Same with daggers - they'd rather be able to grab your ear or grapple your hand then have a second pointy thing to stab you with.
Short weapons, like the katar for example, were in fact, dual wielded. But that is a whole different style from swordfighting (it's as close to swordfighting as wielding a spear is). Just because you have bladed weapons and stab/slash with them does not mean you qualify as a swordsman.
There are great misconceptions added today by Holliwood. Like the guy grabbing a greatsword and cleaving trough plate with it. Historically, greatswords were used much like spears (that's why the bottom part of the blade is wrapped in leather) and were used primarily as thrusting weapons when fighting an armoured foe.
During ancient times a shield was actually a preferred sidearm, and while not "cool" enough for the movies, it's very very useful in battle. Think about it. In the thick of a melee, would you rather have another sword (although a single strike from a single sword is enough to end a fight. Even a graze trough the muscle on your hip for example) or a thick shield to keep the enemy pointy things from reaching you in turn?
Padreigh
First Post
I totally agree. Judging from my experience in sword fighting (which is still limited, but I am getting there ), it is bloody hard to get those cowards hiding behind shields. 
And with two weapons you tend to ... well, forget your off-hand.
But I still think that sometimes fact can bow to fiction nevertheless. And I just don't see my character dragging a shield around in the streets.
Actually, I think I can combine "punching someone in the face" with "a quick stab to the gut" with my feat combo (i.e. two weapon fighting with "unarmed" being the second "weapon"). Or am I getting the rules wrong here?
), it is bloody hard to get those cowards hiding behind shields. And with two weapons you tend to ... well, forget your off-hand.But I still think that sometimes fact can bow to fiction nevertheless. And I just don't see my character dragging a shield around in the streets.
Actually, I think I can combine "punching someone in the face" with "a quick stab to the gut" with my feat combo (i.e. two weapon fighting with "unarmed" being the second "weapon"). Or am I getting the rules wrong here?
Similar Threads
