On Thu, 04 Feb 1999, you wrote:
>I don't think it's a good idea, actually. How many people do you know that can
>hold two swords (one in each hand) and hit thier opponent at the same time
>with both swords? (every round)
>More likely they would be able to use one sword during one round, and the
>other sword during the next round.
Actually, from personal experience with katana and wakazashi, using two swords
simultaneously isn't much harder than using just one. But such a style,
reportedly pioneered by the famous Japanese ronin Miyamoto Musashi (see "Go Rin
No Sho," translated as "The Book of Five Rings," recommended reading for MUD
developers interested in fighting and strategy), probably is best left to when
you are fighting with a group of people. Logically, having two swords limits
the amount of power you can put into one slash, how well you can manuever,
and, barring any exceptional skill on your part and/or a blatant lack of
talent in your opponent, it's best left out of one-on-one combat. Using a
sword and a dagger is no harder than using one sword -- the dagger doesn't get
in the way unless you tend to bring your secondary hand close to your body
(stabbing yourself won't help you win). Basically: short weapons in secondary
hand can be useful, don't interfere much; long weapons in second hand can be
useful when fighting several entites, but require a high degree of
ambidexterity (or dexterity in general) to keep up with a mediocre opponent in
one-on-one combat.
All of the above is, of course, my opinion.
-dak
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://qsilver.queensu.ca/~fletchra/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST