| Most commonly on games people always pick other "builds" Zelda aside, are shields really that uncool? Even in media, most of the time it's one handed. Even if they use one it is only later thrown aside because dueling with one handed sword/ or dual-wielding is "cooler". |
| yes sowrd art online open my eye to dual wield it is very cool fast dps who need shield? also two hand sword is pretty nice too very extra strong, who need mobility with how fast u can eat the enemies lunch they go bye bye super quick |
| Using only one hand with a sword makes the blows weaker. The shield limits the movements you can take. A shield makes little sense if you already have armour on. Shields are more so to block blows from arrows and blunt force weapons rather than blocking the impact of a sword. |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
| Because having a magic wielding sword user is better. Shields only block, who gives a shit. |
 |
| If you dual wield you can still block attacks so why have a shield. But you know in team player games people do use shields to tank since they have a mix of dps and heal. |
YatoGodApr 25, 2016 3:23 PM
 |
| If you've ever seen some hardcore COD players, they love the riot shield. I've never enjoyed using a sword and shield in any RPG game like Skyrim, since I think using magic is more useful to my build. Shields are bulky, and I would rather like to learn how to parry sword attacks instead of blocking them. I also like being quick in fights, and a shield slows you down. |
 |
| In Minecraft you used to be able to block with a sword, but in the new update this now longer works. Instead you have a left hand slot that you may put a shield in to protect yourself. You could put a bow in your left hand for two weapons, but you can't use two swords at once. |
  |
| I actually go sword and board a lot. But yeah, I know a lot don't like it. |
| I use 2 shields to max my DPS in my online games. |
 |
| I remember watching that old Dungeons and Dragons cartoon, and the guy with the Shield was the best character... |
 |
| firearms > shields. /thread. OT: i like two handed weapons like long swords or warhammers/spears. but that's just an aesthetics choice. |
| In the context of video games, it's because shields are generally noob weapons. Offense has always generally been seen as more effective and skillful. Aesthetically shields are too large and dominant. It would overwhelm some characters design and it's not something that looks appealing when put away on your back or something. In terms of actual real life combat. Shields are mainly used by the basic foot soldier. A clumsy tool for lowly fodder. Shields are pretty much known to be used by sword or spear soldiers in tight formations. Shields have always been mainly a weapon for the peasantry. Lances are the best hand weapons, period. Nothing beats it, only good armor is effective at dealing with it. Even then, halberds don't give a shit anyways. Knights and actually worthwhile soldiers have armor. Shields get in the way if you have good armor. Useless. They used longs swords, spears and blunt weapons. In straight up dueling, the rapier and dagger or rapier and cloak are not only superior, they are also much more elegant and skillful weaponry. |
ModeratelyHumanApr 25, 2016 4:34 PM
ModeratelyHuman said: In terms of actual real life combat. Shields are mainly used by the basic foot soldier. A clumsy tool for lowly fodder. Shields are pretty much known to be used by sword or spear soldiers in tight formations. Shields have always been mainly a weapon for the peasantry. Lances are the best hand weapons, period. Nothing beats it, only good armor is effective at dealing with it. Even then, halberds don't give a shit anyways. Knights and actually worthwhile soldiers have armor. Shields get in the way if you have good armor. Useless. They used longs swords, spears and blunt weapons. In straight up dueling, the rapier and dagger or rapier and cloak are not only superior, they are also much more elegant and skillful weaponry. I'd have to disagree on the medieval part, shields are not an everyman equipment, commoners only use pike or spears. A low rank noble or a burgher may owned one, because a combat designated shields actually quite expensive, they need a treated woods, even strengthening and layering with composite woods, canvas, and even leathers, and some even plated and framed with irons and painted with heraldic symbols. It is a common thing for knights and the nobles to have shields in their armory or even has it as a family heirloom, in combat it is the squire duty to carry them around, they also act like the bodyguard of said nobles and knights. Squire themselves is a knight in training that accompany them in battle side by side. In the more ancient times, actual proper shields are wielded by elites, the well known hoplites or roman legions sports shields. Most of ancient world palace and royal guard uses shields, as well as their prized cavalrymen. |
| The most important things in life is the people that you care about |
azzuRe said: ModeratelyHuman said: In terms of actual real life combat. Shields are mainly used by the basic foot soldier. A clumsy tool for lowly fodder. Shields are pretty much known to be used by sword or spear soldiers in tight formations. Shields have always been mainly a weapon for the peasantry. Lances are the best hand weapons, period. Nothing beats it, only good armor is effective at dealing with it. Even then, halberds don't give a shit anyways. Knights and actually worthwhile soldiers have armor. Shields get in the way if you have good armor. Useless. They used longs swords, spears and blunt weapons. In straight up dueling, the rapier and dagger or rapier and cloak are not only superior, they are also much more elegant and skillful weaponry. I'd have to disagree on the medieval part, shields are not an everyman equipment, commoners only use pike or spears. A low rank noble or a burgher may owned one, because a combat designated shields actually quite expensive, they need a treated woods, even strengthening and layering with composite woods, canvas, and even leathers, and some even plated and framed with irons and painted with heraldic symbols. It is a common thing for knights and the nobles to have shields in their armory or even has it as a family heirloom, in combat it is the squire duty to carry them around, they also act like the bodyguard of said nobles and knights. Squire themselves is a knight in training that accompany them in battle side by side. In the more ancient times, actual proper shields are wielded by elites, the well known hoplites or roman legions sports shields. Most of ancient world palace and royal guard uses shields, as well as their prized cavalrymen. I'm mainly talking of the lasting impression they gave. Shields are known mainly for their use in the Roman Legions. Legions, were of course highly respected and trained soldiers, but also in the eyes of the modern world, not an individual, but a faceless cog in the machine of war. It's not a good impression in something like fantasy. In terms of mass war, long two handed spears are the dominant weapon in memory. The spear is the very symbol of war itself. What matters most is not what the shield was used for, but how the shield is seen. That's why, that even the spear is the weapon of all weapons, it's hardly ever seen. It's only swords and has always been swords. Because swords were a fashion statement, swords are a symbol of wealth and power, swords can actually be carried around. The sword not only has the most positive view, it's also the most personal and relatable weapon. That has translated to modern fantasy. |
ModeratelyHuman said: azzuRe said: I'd have to disagree on the medieval part, shields are not an everyman equipment, commoners only use pike or spears. A low rank noble or a burgher may owned one, because a combat designated shields actually quite expensive, they need a treated woods, even strengthening and layering with composite woods, canvas, and even leathers, and some even plated and framed with irons and painted with heraldic symbols. It is a common thing for knights and the nobles to have shields in their armory or even has it as a family heirloom, in combat it is the squire duty to carry them around, they also act like the bodyguard of said nobles and knights. Squire themselves is a knight in training that accompany them in battle side by side. In the more ancient times, actual proper shields are wielded by elites, the well known hoplites or roman legions sports shields. Most of ancient world palace and royal guard uses shields, as well as their prized cavalrymen. I'm mainly talking of the lasting impression they gave. Shields are known mainly for their use in the Roman Legions. Legions, were of course highly respected and trained soldiers, but also in the eyes of the modern world, not an individual, but a faceless cog in the machine of war. It's not a good impression in something like fantasy. In terms of mass war, long two handed spears are the dominant weapon in memory. The spear is the very symbol of war itself. What matters most is not what the shield was used for, but how the shield is seen. That's why, that even the spear is the weapon of all weapons, it's hardly ever seen. It's only swords and has always been swords. Because swords were a fashion statement, swords are a symbol of wealth and power, swords can actually be carried around. The sword not only has the most positive view, it's also the most personal and relatable weapon. That has translated to modern fantasy. I'm sorry I lied, shield is actually quite cheap and one of the main ingredients of basic infantrymen from the ancient times to medieval times just like what you said. I was arguing for the sake of argument just to expound the unknown beautiful complexity of shields. In medieval reality shield and lance combined only costs one third of a helmet, and one sixth of a chain mail, the most expensive piece of equipment to have. Usually nobles paid for all the equipment of their armies, the most basic settings would be the combination of pike and shields, which is cheap and easy to make, unlike swords and armors. I myself love the tank class in classic RPG or MMO, it is quite weird because I'm pretty sure I'm not a masochist, but there is a certain kind of pleasure to pull aggro on half of the hunting ground, I also like the mechanics on some games where shield actually blocks attacks and not just a def stat booster. It is usually accompanied with a beautiful metallic sounds when your enemy desperately tries to put a dent on your massive health bar. If you're a villain you'd be this annoying mid-boss that has insane HP and defense and keep spamming CC on our helpless MC. |
azzuReApr 25, 2016 6:28 PM
| The most important things in life is the people that you care about |
azzuRe said: ModeratelyHuman said: I'm mainly talking of the lasting impression they gave. Shields are known mainly for their use in the Roman Legions. Legions, were of course highly respected and trained soldiers, but also in the eyes of the modern world, not an individual, but a faceless cog in the machine of war. It's not a good impression in something like fantasy. In terms of mass war, long two handed spears are the dominant weapon in memory. The spear is the very symbol of war itself. What matters most is not what the shield was used for, but how the shield is seen. That's why, that even the spear is the weapon of all weapons, it's hardly ever seen. It's only swords and has always been swords. Because swords were a fashion statement, swords are a symbol of wealth and power, swords can actually be carried around. The sword not only has the most positive view, it's also the most personal and relatable weapon. That has translated to modern fantasy. I'm sorry I lied, shield is actually quite cheap and one of the main ingredients of basic infantrymen from the ancient times to medieval times just like what you said. I was arguing for the sake of argument just to expound the unknown beautiful complexity of shields. You mother fucker. I honestly am not well educated enough on historical warfare to be sure even though some of what you said sounded wrong to me. |
| As a Paladin main in FFXI and EQ and every other game, I can tell you that the Sword / Shield combo is under rated but and definitely "uncool" to the uninitiated but... there's an aura of dignity and righteousness about the sword / shield combo I am drunk though brb casting cure on my allies and taking a million points of damage and walking away like a boss  |
 Vor uns liegt MAL, in uns marschiert MAL, und hinter uns, kommt MAL! |
Mkim said: Is the shield scrolled with Weapon attack? Then 1-hand&shield Do you not have a shield scrolled with Weapon attack? Then 2-hand sword Izi pizi If we're talking DnD then 2h weapons are only suited to ogres, trolls, and barbarians. They're the only ones who have the heft to wield them properly. |
| Vor uns liegt MAL, in uns marschiert MAL, und hinter uns, kommt MAL! |
scruf4ls said: firearms > shields. /thread. OT: i like two handed weapons like long swords or warhammers/spears. but that's just an aesthetics choice. I can throw a knife faster than a guy can draw a gun, assuming he doesn't already have it pointed at me. |
| Vor uns liegt MAL, in uns marschiert MAL, und hinter uns, kommt MAL! |
Mkim said: Lothloran said: Was talkin Maplestory but I can't expect realism of a game where the head of the characters are 2 times the size of their bodyIf we're talking DnD then 2h weapons are only suited to ogres, trolls, and barbarians. They're the only ones who have the heft to wield them properly. Woulda needa hella strong body to hold a weapon and dat head ROFL!!! I've actually never played MapleStory, I've played neverwinter, DDAO, FFXI, EQ 1 and 2, GW 1, 2 and 3, Ragnarok, Aeon and Ultima Online etc etc but never MS. |
| Vor uns liegt MAL, in uns marschiert MAL, und hinter uns, kommt MAL! |
Who needs shields? Just don't get hit. And, yes, dual-wielding looks cooler. |
on 
| I'm not a pussy and having a shield indicates I'm afraid |
 |
| I don't think it's lame, but I prefer battlemage over knight. |
 |
| I just saw Berserk and I'm planning in making a Guts style giant sword build when I get Dark Souls 3, does that make me a super nerd? I use a sword and sheild in Monster Hunter, but that's cos the charge blade is the best weapon. People just like to be inventive with their builds. |
 |
| I prefer dual wielding since it has better DPS, I like agile and fast builds, thats why I almost never make two-handed based characters |
"At some point, I stopped hoping." |
| Sword and shield got nothing on the spear & shield. |
| Irl dual weilding isn't effective, but sword and sheild is one of the most effective irl build in a historical battle. |
|
| It's just so basic and generic it's like picking a chocolate milkshake when u can pick a strawberry chocolate cookie milkshake with whipped cream and sprinkles on top |
  |
| I prefer sword and shield because I choose that class in mmos and I would have died in darksouls a lot more without my shield. |
| Shield is for loser, the best offense is the best defense. |
 |
traed said: Using only one hand with a sword makes the blows weaker. The shield limits the movements you can take. A shield makes little sense if you already have armour on. Shields are more so to block blows from arrows and blunt force weapons rather than blocking the impact of a sword. On the other hand, you really want that sweet sield if you're under a rain of arrows. I have to agree that armor+2 handed-sword is better in a melee fight, but to be honest I'd just pick shield+flanged mace. It's the safest pick and you don't need 10 years of training to deliver an efficient blow to an armored opponent. |
DeathkoApr 26, 2016 6:45 AM
Prophetess of the Golden Era  |
| Depends on the game and how useful shields actually are I guess? But usually two-handing or dual-wielding are just more badass and who needs a shield anyway when you can just slaughter your enemies, right? That being said, I have a shield equipped in every Dark Souls game about 90% of the time. It might not be spectacular but it's effective and that's all you'll care about in these games for the most part |
| Sword n Board builds typically have less DPS on most games. The only game where I've gone with Sword n Board was the Dark Souls franchise, and that's for fairly obvious reasons - you do 0 DPS when you're dead. Otherwise, dual wielding and two-handed weapons typically deal substantially more damage and it's more effective to simply be offensive. Because, again, dead enemies deal no damage. In most games the risk of death isn't really there so adding extra defence with a shield is somewhat pointless. |
 It's an entirely different kind of flying, altogether! It's an entirely different kind of flying. |
| Everyone knows that glass cannon spellcasters are way better that stupid knights |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| Because doing damage is more fun, which is why two handed swords are the best. |
| Heck, I would dual-wield with two shields if I were able to find a game that allowed that. I love being able to shrug off attacks others run the hell away from. |
| "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34 |
| people don't understand melee combat. Two swords are flashy but unreliable as fuck and leave you off balance from any deflection. Only people who watch movies think its better than a sword and shield. One of the most effective sword shield combo's of all time were the Romans. with the short sword one of the best designed swords of all time. Most people would probably pick the flashiest weapon and immediately die trying to do some cool leap in the air attack which is equally as dumb because it leaves you exposes and upon leaving the ground you cannot control your motion or where you're going to land. One guy with a spear and its all over skewer kabab. People who call a sword and shield combo in combat lame will end up like the vipers head after the mountain got done with it. Shield is both a blocking and striking weapon, it covers your other side from view and opens up various openings for quick and direct thrusts with a short sword. It can also block projectiles.  |
SpooksMay 18, 2016 12:32 PM
 |
More topics from this board
» Have you ever met anyone who believes governments really are hiding little green men? Or are you one to believe in that stuff?fleurbleue - Yesterday |
17 |
by traed
»»
39 minutes ago |
|
» As a kid ,did you often talk to strangers?VabbingSips - Yesterday |
9 |
by RainyEvenings
»»
56 minutes ago |
|
» Do you ever clean out your online footprints?rohan121 - Yesterday |
17 |
by RainyEvenings
»»
59 minutes ago |
|
» what's a weird and random fear or concern you have?TheBlockernator - Oct 4 |
26 |
by nightjasmine
»»
1 hour ago |
|
» How do you feel about the "Nerds can't get girlfriends" stereotype? Do you think there's truth to it? Why do you think it exists?TheBlockernator - Yesterday |
12 |
by MelodyOfMemory
»»
1 hour ago |