Moderator: Belegarth: Forum Moderators
Kirethorn wrote:Judging from the general consensus of all the posts I've read since joining this forum I've come to the conclusion that the quarterstaff is regarded as the most useless weapon in belegarth (don't ask for quotes). Why is that?
I've taken into account the massive amount of padding required on each end of the weapon, but I still can't see a down side. It seems like the perfect beginners weapon.
Jeggrim wrote:Kirethorn wrote:Judging from the general consensus of all the posts I've read since joining this forum I've come to the conclusion that the quarterstaff is regarded as the most useless weapon in belegarth (don't ask for quotes). Why is that?
I've taken into account the massive amount of padding required on each end of the weapon, but I still can't see a down side. It seems like the perfect beginners weapon.
God dammit you are the **** king of the noobs! Almost every thing you have posted thus far on the boards of a game YOU DON'T PLAY is asinine! Seriously, why in the hell are you still posting here? You don't **** play. You pretty much said you'd never play. In fact, all you've done is * about our game (i.e. our weapons flex too much, they're too light, its expensive, not hardcore, armors too restrictive, staffs rule) I mean really GTFO!
Oh and I bolded that part for you so you can almost answer your own question... You know why you don't see a downside? YOU DONT **** PLAY! Its hard to "see" the downside when you've NEVER SEE US FIGHT. Stop. Please. Just **** stop.
--Jegg
Jeggrim wrote:
God dammit you are the **** king of the noobs! Almost every thing you have posted thus far on the boards of a game YOU DON'T PLAY is asinine! Seriously, why in the hell are you still posting here? You don't **** play. You pretty much said you'd never play. In fact, all you've done is * about our game (i.e. our weapons flex too much, they're too light, its expensive, not hardcore, armors too restrictive, staffs rule) I mean really GTFO!
Oh and I bolded that part for you so you can almost answer your own question... You know why you don't see a downside? YOU DONT **** PLAY! Its hard to "see" the downside when you've NEVER SEE US FIGHT. Stop. Please. Just **** stop.
--Jegg
Winfang wrote:
Forkbeard wrote:Yeah, sleeper, that's crap. I don't know where you heard it, but it's bs.
Quarterstaff is a farmer weapon. The are only serious weapons when either
A)everyone is equally(poorly) armed.
B)You're fighting someone whos retarded.
FB
Sleeper wrote:*sigh* look em up. Ofcourse the quarterstaff fitted with these metal caps going against plate armour is speculation, however, it was stated that all swords were at more risk of breaking than the armour. They also said that axe's and maces filled that position better.
George Silver wrote:Yet understand, that in battles, and where variety of weapons are, among multitudes of men and horses, the sword and target, the two handed sword, battle axe, the black bill, and halberd, are better weapons, and more dangerous in their offense and forces, than is the sword and buckler, short staff, long staff, or forest bill. The sword and target leads upon shot, and in troops defends thrusts and blows given by battle axe, halberds, black bill, or two handed swords, far better than can the sword and buckler.
The morris pike defends the battle from both horse and man, much better than can the short staff, long staff, or forest bill. Again the battle axe, the halberd, the black bill, the two handed sword, and sword & target, among armed men and troops, by reason of their weights, shortness, and great force, do much more offend the enemy, & are then much better weapons, than is the short staff, the long staff, or the forest bill.
George Silver wrote:Now for the vantage of the short staff against the sword and buckler, sword & target, two handed sword, single sword, sword and dagger, or rapier and poniard, there is no great question to be in any of these weapons. Whensoever any blow or thrust shall be strongly made with the staff, they are ever in false place, in the carriage of the wards, for if at any of these six weapons he carries his ward high & strong for his head, as of necessity he must carry it very high, otherwise it will be too weak to defend a blow being strongly made at the head, then will his space be too wide, in due time to break the thrust from his body. Again, if he carries his ward lower, thereby to be in equal space for readiness to break both blow & thrust, then in that place his ward is too low, and too weak to defend the blow of the staff: for the blow being strongly made at the head upon that ward, will beat down the ward and his head together, and put him in great danger of his life.
Return to Fighting Skill Development & Training
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests