Just for fun, i'd point out that in a prison, shields are used to contain/block/restrict inmates who are being forcefully removed from a cell (for whatever reason), and riot police are taught (from my experience) to use it for more than just blocking thrown objects. Even more fun can be had if you include the idea that prisons have "shock shields" that can be used to restrict a prisoner's movement *and* hit them with a charge to subdue them.Shields role is to stop objects - its not going to do much if objects don't really want to stop.
And in both of these instances, you're not dealing with mindless mass of meat, both of these recognize shields and will hesitate instead of piling up on you.Just for fun, i'd point out that in a prison, shields are used to contain/block/restrict inmates who are being forcefully removed from a cell (for whatever reason), and riot police are taught (from my experience) to use it for more than just blocking thrown objects. Even more fun can be had if you include the idea that prisons have "shock shields" that can be used to restrict a prisoner's movement *and* hit them with a charge to subdue them.![]()
Throughout history, shields have been *much* more than just object stoppers. There are no shortage of examples for shields being used offensively in tandem, or even without, melee weapons.
Even if you take the position it's just a hunk of wood for stopping inanimate objects, there's no getting around the fact that getting slammed with one is going to have some effect regardless of something/one who won't or can't stop.![]()
I disagree with basically all of this.And in both of these instances, you're not dealing with mindless mass of meat, both of these recognize shields and will hesitate instead of piling up on you.
Throughout history shields were never once used against anything else then humans who possess ability to think and can get demoralized.
And sure, shields are a weapon just as much as sword in historical context, but again, its usefulness drops to zero if you are against something that literally doesn't have fear and outnumbers you.
Hm, thats correct if you fight in formations like the Vikings, Spartans or Romans etc.The only time people in history where really dual-wielding melee-weapons was with a Rapier and a Dagger (in a dueling situation).Having two melee weapons is pointless. Better to have a shield in the second hand or handling a two handed weapon.
I'd 2H the Bat. I played baseball for years growing up. A single power attack to the head from a bat in the hand of a seasoned baseball player and you are dead. If you aren't dead your skull is in so many pieces you will wish you were.-- Sure. Depending. If I saw three rabid dogs running at me and had the time to pick between;
a shield, say a typical modern riot shield for arguments sake
a baseball bat
a hunting knife (6" blade)
a bolt action hunting rifle holding 3 rounds in it's magazine and one in the chamber
a 'typical' 9mm semi-automatic pistol with a 15 round magazine
a pump-action 12 guage shotgun with 7 rounds in the tube and one chambered
Uh with a shotgun you can that without having to time it so you connect with the head of a charging animal.I'd 2H the Bat. I played baseball for years growing up. A single power attack to the head from a bat in the hand of a seasoned baseball player and you are dead. If you aren't dead your skull is in so many pieces you will wish you were.
Sure, 2h'd swing of a bat is what I was thinking of. But was also thinking that the 3 rabid dogs would basically be on you at the same time, so said, 'you're going to get bitten, better your legs than your head or neck,...'I'd 2H the Bat. I played baseball for years growing up. A single power attack to the head from a bat in the hand of a seasoned baseball player and you are dead. If you aren't dead your skull is in so many pieces you will wish you were.