Saber Forum

Ok, so I was reading the thread below, titled "Two handed disadvantages", and had originally thought it meant "Two SABER disadvantages".  Well, it turned out to not be that, so I thought I'd start up this one.

Anywho, we've all discussed the disadvantages of a saberstaff, and know that Duel-Wielding is much more deadly, and has many more options.  My question is, what are the disadvantages of duel wielding?  The only one I can think of right now is that you have to be careful not to trap your own saber with your other one.

Ready... Go!

The only one that comes to my mind straight from the gate is that you will be focused on two blades at one time lessening your ability to meet every challenge that comes your way.  It is often hard to do two things at once.  Other than that, I cannot see a disadvantage passed that.

Mixing up your hands is a common problem for beginning dual wielders. Another disadvantage, like wielding one saber with one hand, you are foregoing strength for speed and reach. Same with dual wielding, not to mention the fact that you are dividing your mind between three blades now. A lot of people forget they have the other blade.

Anyways, on the flip side of that, Miyamoto Musashi was a huge proponent of dual wielding. So There's that too.

Less power and less leverage to your blows.

Rather than absorbing the force of a blow with both arms and distributing the force through both, dual wielding means each arm is taking its own shot as you block, which means each arm is going to get tired faster.

There's also the fact that a weapon in one hand can get batted aside/deflected more easily.

Less strength behind the strikes and blocks but a bit more speed. The ablitity to defend and attack simultaneously, but its more difficult to coordinate the two.

If you read R.A. Salvatore's books about Drizzt Do'Udren (A drow ranger dual wielding scimitars)

He frequently says in the series that many dual wielders are perfect on attack, and perfect on defense, but very very few are perfect on both at the same time.

Nicely put, Vel. And good reference to Drizzt..again lol.

I've watched a lot of Spartacus over the past couple year, and when they introduced Gannicus, it made things a whole lot cooler for me even thought Sparty was a duel wielder as well. Gannicus uses 2 gladius swords and is extremely quick. I'm pretty sure he says something in the show about using his off-hand blade as more of a makeshift shield and the main key...KEEP MOVING!

Also, if you decide to go duel wield with US, I would suggest using 32" blades for more control :)

Guess I have more videos to do now lol!

Im thinking dual wielding initiates with initiate blades would be really really fun, very fast and agile style.

And because they are lighter shorter blades, you keep more of your strength behind the strikes and blocks, because your hand and arm are not getting as fatigued by a longer heavier saber.

So basically, the greatest weakness of duel wielding is the same as a single-handed saber:  Less control/power behind the saber.

Although, I will counter with this:  If needed, you could brace your blocking saber with your off-hand saber.  Make an X shape to catch you opponent's strike.

Another weakness:  You don't have a free hand.  If I'm fighting single-saber, I often use my free hand to grapple, throw stuff, shoot a blaster, etc.  It also lets me pass the saber off to surprise my opponent "I am not left handed" style.  You can't do any of the duel-wielding.

And yeah, I use 32" blades anyways.  Unless I'm going two-handed, in which case I can easily handle the extra length.

You're more susceptible to strategies that incorporate lateral movement when you dual wield. I move side to side to keep my opponent from presenting more than one blade at a time and then try to clear that single blade for a counter attack opportunity. I've also noticed that many who use a balanced pair often use a stance that keeps the primary hand in front and makes the off hand slow to act. When I dual wield I tend to favor a long/short combo with my off hand leading the stance. That off hand is then my primary method of engagement as I look to tie up my opponents blade with the short saber and land a counter attack with the long one. One piece of advice... learn an effective X style block to counter power strategies.

Good point Jammo!

As I stated before, Miyamoto Musashi, the author of the Book of Five Rings, and arguably the greatest swordsman to ever have lived was a huge proponent of dual wielding, and his school that was founded roughly translates to the school of two swords if I remember correctly.

This brings me to my next point, if your tactics are good enough, you can use any weapon variant and excel at combat!

I really can't emphasize enough how important I find shorter blades to be for this.  I'm sure some of us can probably single hand a 36" Raven rather comfortably, but this is the exception not the rule.  I can swing one, personally, for a very very short period of time with little control.  This might look intimidating for the first 10 seconds, but it's next to useless in a fight.

I like my initiate blades, the reach disadvantage probably isn't worth it and I'm interested to try out some 30-32" blades to see how they handle, but for now I stick with initiates.  I've also just discovered how much I prefer to have my hands evenly weighted, after using two dissimilar hilts for a while.

I've never felt more in control and fluid as with two initiate hilts / blades.  And I guess there's benefit in finding your comfort zone.  I'd say you can either pick up what feels natural to you, and adapt your style to enhance your natural ability, or adapt your nature to a tactical advantage you want to gain through strength training and practice.  The latter is probably wiser in the long run, but I'm not a martial artist. 

Well for actual bladework i used to use a match pair of scimitars that were 36 inches long hilt to tip. It can be difficult to get used to, but having the matched blades really can make a world of difference, i really wouldnt use anything longer than that, it would just feel too awkward to me

This^

I'm constantly trying to get faster so I can make up for my loos of reach.

It actually almost feels like Knife fighting when I hold them in reverse, and dual wielding Gladius (Who knows the plural of that before I have to go google it.) held normally.

Yeah there's definitely a couple of different variants even with dual wielding... You can dual wield two short sabers, two long sabers, or a tandem of one long saber and one short saber...

Or you can go crazy and dual wield a staff and a single hilt saber.... HEHE

Each one you change up your strategy accordingly.

Holy crap, trying to catch up on this... some great points all throughout.

First off, Veld gets a point for mentioning Drizzt.  Second, I agree that less power is to be had in each hand (although believe me, you can still get a TON of power with good strong single handed wielding).  Third, Lucien gets a point for referencing Miyamoto Musashi.

This sounds silly, but the way dual wielding is approached in KOTOR is pretty damn accurate to real life IMO.  You have to put ranks in the skill, and until you get quite a few points in there you basically suck at it.  In real life, you have to train at it until you get to the point where you break even... in other words, you stop tangling yourself just enough to make it worth your while.  Train past that, and it becomes a great strength!

The inherent difficulty in wielding two blades (especially long ones) is directly related to its strength.  For most swordsmen, even experienced ones, it's difficult enough to focus on their ONE blade in combat - striking, parrying, etc.  For the average human mind, adding a blade to this seems maddening... for both yourself and your opponent... and therein lies the strength (and weakness).  Once you stop confusing yourself with two blades, you're only confusing your opponent (who has just as much trouble focusing on two completely discrete weapons as you did).

Traditionally dual weilding was more of a sword and dagger combo for fencing.

Or gladitoral fighting more for show.

When the common use was sword and sheild, losing a sheild to an additional weapon was not always a wise choice.Now with Light sabers sheilds for the most part are passe and unlikely.( yes i know there were some i the comics and books but rare showings)

I like to weild 2 weapons i do find you apply less force to the blows but your usually using shorter blades increasing reaction time so kinda evens out.
i tend to move close circular and use more parry thrust combos.

sure your worrrying about 3 blades but once you get used to where each blade you weild and your foot work thats really the only disadvantage.

dropping the shield for another weapon was pretty much suicide in open warfare. Especially in the bronze age and the roman age, simply because of the way their armies carried out warfare with their formations.

However, for skirmishing/guerilla tactics where surprise and speed were key, it worked very very well.

I used my yari and a short saber one time... that was intense.

Makes for some crazy dynamics doesn't it?

As has been said, I too would say that the biggest disadvantage is having to coordinate two blades. I can't count how many times I've seen kids trying to be cool by using two cheapo Hasbro sabers and ending up hitting themselves either in the legs or face. Makes for a good laugh once in a while but gets frustrating after the first few incidents.