daveywavey wrote: » Though, I'd still suggest that it's more practical than dual spears...!
Noaani wrote: » daveywavey wrote: » Though, I'd still suggest that it's more practical than dual spears...! For a bit over a century, specific solders in the Roman army were equipped with three spears. I'm not going to go in to any more detail than that though.
daveywavey wrote: » Damokles wrote: » What someone would use is something like a wakizashi. One longer sword with a shortsword. Very true. Though, I'd still suggest that it's more practical than dual spears...!
Damokles wrote: » What someone would use is something like a wakizashi. One longer sword with a shortsword.
Sathrago wrote: » I guess now would be the time to chime in with, "It's a fantasy game." Let us not get to crazy about things needing to be "realistic". In archeage I could transmog my 2h mace into a big tuna fish. I don't doubt that something similarly goofy will happen here. dual-wielding a quarterstaff and a sword or two katanas, it's up to the developers on how much time they wanna invest in such options. I say do it.
Atama wrote: » Realism is one thing. Having characters carry around things in a ridiculous, cartoonish way is another. The developers have already expressed a desire to get away from the "Warhammer/WoW" trope of carrying weapons that look like inflated props. Which is definitely going to improve this game's aesthetic immensely.
Sathrago wrote: » Atama wrote: » Realism is one thing. Having characters carry around things in a ridiculous, cartoonish way is another. The developers have already expressed a desire to get away from the "Warhammer/WoW" trope of carrying weapons that look like inflated props. Which is definitely going to improve this game's aesthetic immensely. I would have to disagree. many games that go for a realistic look fall short and ultimately run into the brick wall of graphic progression that quickly takes what used to look real and makes it look horrible in comparison. This is why the warhammer/wow aesthetic works as it is a stylized aesthetic that does not lose its charm over time. I do not wish that on AoC but that might end up happening.
Tacualeon wrote: » Noaani wrote: » daveywavey wrote: » Though, I'd still suggest that it's more practical than dual spears...! For a bit over a century, specific solders in the Roman army were equipped with three spears. I'm not going to go in to any more detail than that though. Those are not spears, those were pillums and they were intended to be thrown before engaging in melee with shield and sword. Their points were designed to bend after being thrown so the enemy couldn't pick them up. Pillums are closer to javelins, meant for skirmishing and harrassing prior to main engagement. They weren't meant to be handled as spears. Greeks fought with spear, shield and side-sword. Romans fought with sword, shield and javelins.
Noaani wrote: » Pillum are a subset of javelins, for sure. Thing is, javelins are a subset of spears. As such, anyone holding a pillum is holding a javelin, and anyone holding a javelin is holding a spear. So it follows that if a Roman soldier is holding three pillum, they are holding three spears.
daveywavey wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Pillum are a subset of javelins, for sure. Thing is, javelins are a subset of spears. As such, anyone holding a pillum is holding a javelin, and anyone holding a javelin is holding a spear. So it follows that if a Roman soldier is holding three pillum, they are holding three spears. They didn't triple-wield them, though. They threw them and then switched to their sword.
