Dewl barsturd swordz yo!


log in or register to remove this ad

Kzach said:
There are people with double-digit IQ's nodding their heads in agreement with me all over the world. There is a point when the verisimilitude of a system can only be pushed so far and this breaks through the 'ok, it's far-fetched, but...' barrier and out the other side into Ridiculous World.

I play D&D because I get to do things in the game that I cannot do in life. I realize there are people in the real world that can dual wield bastard swords and look good doing it, but I am not one of them.

All I am saying is, my triple digit IQ understands the difference between reality and fantasy, and so I see no reason for dual wielding of bastard swords to be a problem.
 


Don't D&D characters have like superhuman strength and such?

If you've already suspended disbelief far enough to allow the existence of such superhuman strength, it doesn't seem such a stretch to accept that superhumanly strong characters can fight with 2 big weapons.

I mean really, it destroys my suspension of disbelief that there isn't any way to dual wield two-handed weapons in each hand. Not even if you have a 28 strength? Come on. That's ridiculous.
 

ethandrul said:
The idea of attacking with 2 bastard swords is just plain unrealistic.
Thank you!

Bastard swords aren't katana's for one thing. They're built based on leverage. They're basically a big meat-cleaver, not a delicately balanced, 1000-folded piece of steel that is a homage to artisans everywhere.

Getting the type of force needed to swing a bastard sword effectively literally pulls you off-balance in whatever direction you swing it. Imagine holding a wood-chopping axe in one hand in swinging it a punching bag (don't try this at home folks) and then having to do that with another one in the other hand.

There is a reason there were never dual bastard sword (or even longsword) wielding warriors in history.
 


I agree basically that using dual bastard sword is balanced by the rule but the mental image is disturbing.

Even in movies you don't see that kind of things and yet they thrive on doing unrealistic but cool looking exploits. But even with aluminium swords, a man just can't wield two bastard sword gracefully, let alone effectively. Too long. As a matter of fact, wielding two longswords (as defined by D&D) is also inefective IRL. Yet Mad Martigan made it look cool in Willow so it's good enough for my D&D.

But dual Bastard sword breach the Anime wall for me. It's too much. You can't find a movie that portrays something similar in a cool fashion, AFAIK. Maybe if this was an adaptation of Exalted I would allow this but in typical D&D it's just too much.

If the player just crave dual wielding D10, go for two axes. Another ineffective idea that at least can be made to look cool with the right choreography and thus fit my D&D.
 

Kzach said:
So, rangers can put up with the same off-hands as everyone else does and LIKE IT.


Clapclapclapclapclapclap
I can't wrap my suspension of disbelief around that one either. (Yes, dragons are more believable to me.)
 

I agree, for one of us EnWorlders to attempt dual wielding bastard swords would result in what you describe. But, I'm gonna go ahead and say, with perfect clarity, that if a world-class swordfighter decided he was going to become an expert in using 2 bastard swords at the same time, it would happen, and it would happen with nasty effectiveness.
 

Kzach said:

heck, I have a aluminum sword with stainless steel guard and pummel with a wooden grip. its 48 inches overall. I would laugh at anyone who thought they could use it one handed as easily as i could use it two handed.

its an Italian German hybrid. large and in charge yet with an elegant and graceful feel to it.

ps

larp swords don't count, but I'm still better two handed, rather then with one in each hand. With foam you can throw traditional sword fighting out the window... or at least into the next room over.
 
Last edited:

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top