Swords & shields vs swords alone

/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiatoria
scholagladiatoria.spreadshirt....
/ matt_easton
www.antique-swords.co.uk

[@shadiversity]

What I find really interesting is that from my recent practice I had drawn the exact same conclusion. I am actually a worse swordsman when I use a sword and medium shield compared to just longsword alone for the very reason's you've mentioned. that shield stops me from moving and using my sword on that side which really affects my versatility. It also blocks my view of that side and I'm so much worse at seeing the attacks that come in on that angle. I now take advantage of those weaknesses when others use a medium shield and beat them very soundly with my single longsword.

[@mithmon2084]

+Shadiversity Hey, maybe you can make a video about shield + [weapon] combinations? At [6:20] Matt makes a point about the interaction sword+shield has with your stance/shoulder positioning. Comparing a (one-handed) sword with a (one-handed) spear, generally the sword sacrifices reach to give many more options (more effective cuts, crossguard, shorter for confined space, easier to carry, more nimble, better grip, increased attractiveness). What Matt didn't really delve into, is that adding a full sized shield negatively impacts a sword *more* than a spear, because (assuming one-handed spear and one-handed sword were equal weapons) the sword loses more functionality. Using a shield, with the shield shoulder forward: 1) Reduces the sword's reach by a greater percentage compared to the longer spear. 2) Limits the sword's slashing angle options, when the spear didn't have that option to lose. 3) Nullifies the sword's guard in most cases. 4) Nimbleness is less important behind a big shield. 5) A big shield isn't going to be "easy" to carry anyway, even if your sword doesn't get in the way. (If you make a video on it, please focus on overhand spear, not underarm. Also, learn to pronounce pommel, please.)

[@giveussomevodka]

Next time, swords&shields vs shields alone. The answer might surprise you!

[@robertgutierrez939]

"Where do you keep the 16ft pike?!?" Answer: in betwixt the cheeks, sir...

[@texasbeast239]

Halfling doffs his sling, and draws his 16 ft pike. "Where the hell were you hiding that--ooh, never mind!"

[@SpaceMissile]

gotta get one of those ones that stays limp until it's ready to be used.

[@zxb995511]

It should be noted that what you said holds true for 1 on 1 combat, in battle formations shield efectiveness is increased much more.

[@bastiaanvanos462]

On a large medieval battlefield the shield definitely gives welltrained troops an edge. But then you are also talking about cover from arrows for example and getting close to pike or spearmen. I think noone will dispute that the phalanx was an effective unit.

[@scholagladiatoria]

Certainly - I am only talking about one on one combat here.

[@phileas007]

Absolutely, shields are so effective, they are still being used today. However, in a formation, they also expose and emphasise the weaknesses, such as the lower legs.

[@haydneasy9736]

The same is true for spears, used on mass they beat short weapons nearly every time

[@user-ps1kr5lq7u]

indeed

[@Evan-rj9xy]

I've always loved the comical nature of the "Mary Poppins bag" in video games. Even if it's entirely ridiculous, it still gives a bit of a chuckle now and then. Especially in M&B when you pull a great lance out of... uhm... I'm not actually sure where you would keep a great lance lol

[@tehanureaver4299]

it would be better to use some form of caravan or a henchmen to carry your weapons. And you should be able to change your layout only between the battles.

[@deektedrgg]

It'll be interesting to see if the improved modding tools will allow for more realistic item usage. Like pikemen that drop their pikes on the ground and draw their swords when pushed into a corner, squires that bring you weapons, or servants that supply your archers with more arrows after they run out.

[@tehanureaver4299]

Actually, Assassin's Creed allows for a pretty realistic weapon usage. You can take away a pike from a soldier, but you cannot just travel with it.deektedrgg

[@blackdeath4eternity]

in mount & blade you have the chest at your flag in most field battles, i think its perfectly acceptable to change your load-out at that as long as the enemy is not attacking you, if you wanted though changing it from a chest to a wagon would most likely be better.

[@Evan-rj9xy]

Yeah that's a really good idea! Maybe you could even order it to move and stay out of the fight or you could hide behind it to take cover.

[@TrollDragomir]

Vikingr mod for Warband had you drop polearms on the ground when you draw your secondary weapon. That was an awesome mechanic!

[@chaos_omega]

About having a free hand: I'm so glad you see the value of grappling in a real fight. I've had some discussions with people, who train in the so-called "reality based self-defence" styles, and they see any form of grappling as basically suicide in a real fight... Even if it's something like trying to control the arm holding the weapon!

[@falconJB]

In most self-defense situations(not a war), grappling is a terrible idea because you don't want to kill the person you just want to get away, so strike and retreat is a far better option(unless you are in the open and they have a gun) and if you are unarmed and unarmored grappling with an armed opponent you are far more likely to end up with a lethal wound, unless the skill gap between you and your opponent is hugely in your favor. Reality Based Self-Defense is dealing with very different situations to two armed and likely armored men trying to kill each other and so how one fights is also very different.

[@bakters]

I guess that's just a pendulum swinging away from the idea that grappling is the "ultimate" self defense system, since BJJ is effective in the octagon? In case they are serious, show them some treaties on Renaissance self defense. With or without weapons it's all based on grappling.

[@chaos_omega]

+bakters It's partly that, I think. But also ego. They aren't willing to learn something new or admit that they were wrong about it. Anyway, I think this is why I became interested in HEMA... I realised how much crossover there was!

[@Igor-ev5wp]

I think Matt partly touched the topic in one of his earlier videos about grappling vs striking in hand-to-hand combat. He didn't speak on this topic per se, but I would conclude from what he said that the difference between Renaissance self-defense systems vs those of today is the availability of knives and daggers. I'd say, grappling with a knife-armed opponent is a different proposition if he fully expects you to pull out a dagger from somewhere all the time.

[@bakters]

Igor Gafarov Yes, I agree. Rolling on the ground when knives are involved seems like a really, seriously bad idea to me. Both sides lose. So that's why earlier systems did not concentrate on the rolling part much. You were supposed to stay upright. Basically, all traditional grappling was about throwing your opponent to the ground, while you stayed on your feet, ready to grab a weapon or run. Contemporary styles hardly match up to that, in my personal opinion. They are either bare-handed punching styles, which are fine, until the other guy improvises a weapon capable of dealing damage through your guard, or they are ground-fighting styles. Which brings us to a very ironic point I'm trying to get across. That those "impractical" weapon based historical styles can give you the best chance of surviving a real fight, involving chairs, broken beer bottles, cutlery and multitude of opponents.

[@Maedelrosen]

4:53 analogy for marriage

[@kungfuasgaeilge]

Rapier and dagger may escape this to some extent :P

[@electronkaleidoscope5860]

D:

[@jacobstaten2366]

The rapier and dagger are swingers that you don't swing with. 🤔

[@tehanureaver4299]

This sword is so beautiful

[@michaelhenman4887]

I actually haven't watched this channel in a while, but this video was great, keep up the quality content Matt!

[@schm00b0]

A shield can also be a weapon. While you can grab with your hand or punch an opponent, so can you attack with your shield. Also, one can keep a shield close to the body and use it more as an armor than as an active defense, though, even then, it can still be used to block an attack. That way the sword arm is forward and the shield doesn't require much thinking about it. As I see it, a combination of sword and shield sacrifices some of the mobility for an extra protection. Since shields were pretty cheap compared to metal armor, it seems as a sound trade-off.

[@coreddit]

Hammerspace -The technical therm for the place where the pike was carried.

[@nicholasleon7819]

These videos are nice for posing my contemptor galatus

[@darryl7527]

"To sum up, Context". Really enjoyed another great video! Your bringing reason and reality to YT with the sword!

[@Primalintent]

In the rpg "Pillars of Eternity" shields decrease accuracy, I always liked that touch.

[@ThisOldHat]

I actually despise that feature.

[@Primalintent]

Why?

[@Dizarrey]

Well it doesn't make very much sense, does it? if it decreased parry or range it would make sense, but you're no less likely to hit because of wearing a shield. It sounds like just punishing people for using shields.

[@balgursdate5955]

Yes you are, since you have whole angles of attack you can't exploit. Basically sometimes because there's a shield in the way you have to use suboptimal -thus less likely to land squarely- strikes. They illustrate it with an overall decrease in accuracy, which isn't so bad I think.

[@Dizarrey]

but that still isn't accuracy, it's either maneuverability or range. if I'm holding a shield in my left hand and need to strike on my left side, I can turn and strike with no less accuracy than a strike straight ahead of me. it might take me longer to get there, but the strike isn't any less accurate.

[@douglastuck3736]

I've fought sword and shield, two sword, and glaive in single combat, melee, and shield walls in SCA 20+ years and HEMA. Spear is not just cheap to make, it's cheap to train. It takes a significant amount of training to effectively use a sword in combat. Shields in formation kick ass. Even if you do have excellent armour, you depend on movement for defence without a shield, and you lose that in formation. Close formations also limit the blows you can throw, so you may as well carry a shield or a weapon with significant range. We tended to use shieldsmen in front of pikes, with archers. The shieldwall protects the pikes, who do most of the killing. One on one, fighting without a shield is not a huge disadvantage, but I used to be a skirmisher (flanking) in wars, because frontal attacking a shieldwall with a onehanded weapon and no shield is suicidal. One of the guys next to, or behind the guy you're facing will get you, and there is very little you can do to a defensive shieldsman

[@austincountryman9834]

Love your channel by the way

[@ryarod]

This is something I've long wanted to know your input on. Thank you very much for this. On a side-note, I'm a Mount and Blade player, and for what it's worth, when I use a pike, I try to use *only* the pike. I try to train myself not to make a habit of putting it away, drawing something else, and then drawing it back out.

[@nyarlatothep666]

I had read a story from a South African guy who got attacked after parking his car. He explained that he's a competitive shooter. Nevertheless, while he was moving for cover, he was shooting one handed instead of two handed like in training or competition. He wondered why, and me too. Thinking about it, and doing some tests, I arrived to the conclusion that I move faster and am more agile when I have one hand free. Therefore, wouldn't a shied impede movement, especially on an uneven battlefield?

[@rurb7365]

Does anyone else want to see an armoury video? the amount of weapons in Mat's house is insane

[@scholagladiatoria]

Technically, that isn't my house.

[@Turigamot]

The advantage gained with the shield is logarithmic! The greater the number of people with shields in formation, the more effective that formation becomes. A shield is good. A shield wall is excellent.

[@viktorkachovski5252]

So happy that a person that generally practices saber, holds his hand in front when using an arming sword :) I've almost never seen this used with other popular HEMA practitioners and the hand on the back with the arming sword just looks silly, not to mention the huge advantage lost in grappling situations.

[@terenzohugel2293]

"Are they twice as effective?" That's why I like a fighting system like in the german pen & paper rpg "The Black Eye". With every weapon you have an attack and a "parade" value/skill, the first used to successfully land blows, the second to defend against enemy blows. Adding a shield (besides helping against arrows and stuff) gives you depending on the shield e.g. an -2/3 modifier to your AT/PA so you're now less able to attack, but better in defending with a (slight) overall bonus. Also learning to fight with a shield consumes an insane lot of XP in that game. If you really manage to learn using a shield to it's extreme it get's really effective in that game, especially in combination with the skill "formation" and other players with a similar playstyle.

[@jacobstaten2366]

On the one hand, most games allow you to carry way to many or awkward weapons, but others limit you to one or two. Theoretically, you could tuck stuff away if it's not too awkward, but it takes a lot of time time to get those things out of your kit.

[@HoJu1989]

Starting to train with rapier and dagger the first thing I noticed was that I couldn't switch the sword hand quickly when it becomes tired

[@floydporter3101]

Boss held Shields can change the dynamic of using both weapons in unison as well as changing the amount of things you can do when use it as a panel.

[@gillesmeura3416]

very interesting point about effect of complexity (managing 2 object) on speed of learning

[@GermanSwordMaster]

That XVIII tho. Wonderful thing ^^ Nice points again in this and the last vid on the topic. Had a discussion with a firned about this lately.

[@ethancobbe-hoggan4451]

Hey Matt, love the video. I understand that some people used swords for self defence and wanted to know if this was the main purpose of a buckler as it would b more portable. Thanks again and amazing content

[@matthewmuir8884]

I am currently writing a fantasy novel series where, in book 1, one of the protagonists is a mercenary with a longsword and one of the main villains is a knight armed with an arming sword and a heater shield. So I've been wondering for a while now if my protagonist is at a disadvantage or not. This video has helped quite a bit in that regard and it has given me a few ideas for how the fight scenes could work. Thanks.

[@CoffeeSnep]

If love to see some videos on the composition of medieval armies. How many were poorly equipped peasants? How many better equipped "men at arms"? Mercenaries? knights? Their formations, tactics, strategy, and exactly who had which weapons at which times would be greatly fascinating.

[@Valkanna.Nublet]

The movements with putting each shoulder forwards to increase / reduce the effectiveness of what's in that hand made me think of latest D&D rules about stances. You have the dueling stance which adds to single handed weapon damage. That's putting your right shoulder forwards. You have the defensive stance which adds to armour. If using a shield that could be seen as putting left shoulder forwards. The idea does fail a bit with the fact that you don't require a shield for defensive stance but most people using that stance probably do have a shield.

[@Cabochon1360]

In the SCA, I typically use a longsword. I can beat a shieldman, but it's damn hard work. Thinking of trying a shield again. Historically, they were popular for a reason.

[@allenmciver3858]

Your videos are fun and informative. So many Dungeon and Dragons myths dismissed!!

[@Szujhinzu]

Not gonna lie, I love this Superdry tracksuit

[@tapioperala3010]

Great video, Matt! However, I would say that in some situations having the other hand free is an advantage (ie. tight confines, etc.).

[@leornendeealdenglisc]

Informative video. Thank you. :)

[@Atrahasis7]

However from historical accounts, proficient Knights with sword and Shield were really scary back in the day, with armor and shield many were veritable human fortresses.

[@Lunumbrus]

I think it's in...South Asian martial arts, when you don't choose to carry a pair of sticks/blades, your unarmed hand isn't referred to as "empty", but "live". As in, the hand that isn't stuck gripping a weapon is your "live" hand, and is expected to act as a weapon also, in terms of grappling, grabbing, and striking.

[@markkelly9621]

Are you sponsored by Superdry?! on a serious note, good video as usual.

[@autolykos9822]

As far as RPGs are concerned, I quite like how Shadowrun (3e) handles it: Your off-hand weapon is a separate skill, and any success you roll with that gives you another die to roll for the main skill. So it's more stuff to learn and gives a solid advantage, but it's significantly less than twice as good (A char with two swords and both skills will very consistently lose to two guys with one sword each and the same skill, but has a good edge over one of them). Pretty much exactly what you describe. (Note that melee combat rolls in SR are attack and defense at the same time - so the off-hand weapon helps with both to some degree).

[@Erick_Bloodaxe]

Matt, you really ought to try out the Mount and Blade Warband: Viking Conquest game. The historical setting quite well done especially considering it wasn't originally part of the game.

[@djsourcream2668]

Can you please do a video on whether it would be practical to use a shield with a dagger? Thanks.

[@usbektimur]

An interesting point, thanks.

[@georgemalec423]

Very nice video, gave me a new perspective on this. I would maybe still argue that shield have also psychological effect (feeling safer) also if we add bows and crossbows in this ...again balance changes. One thing I would say you missed is the armour. If you have good armour shield is less important, if you both have no armour and you have sword+shield I would say your advantage is big. SUGESTION: can you make a video on two-handed swords? how, when and why theey were use? what is the advantage etc.

[@KlatchianVampire]

thanks! that was very informative!

[@onurarikan3393]

How about center grip shields? I know the reach arguments and attention apply but it feels as if the center give more distancing and angling options for the shield than do strap.

[@chabis]

There's a mythbusters episode where thy tried how it feels to carry the equipment you get while doing a level od doom. Surprisingly a trained soldier actually could carry it all without getting slowed down. But pikes weren't in that arsenal.

[@Andrhens]

That sword is truly beatiful. If it had side rings then it'd be a very useful and versitile weapon.

[@charliep6358]

Have you tried the Battle for Europe mod for Mount and Blade? It's on the steam workshop and has a load of features that address points like this. (eg. When you switch weapon from a polearm etc you drop it, you have other interesting limits to carrying things as well as plate armour having a chance of deflecting attacks (Only melee unfortunately) intead of only reducing the damage)

[@christophersmith8848]

I didn't hear a word you said the first time I watched this, that sword was so shiny I was distracted

[@lancerd4934]

Just imagine that your squire is carrying all your weapons off-screen and hands one to you when you call for it.

[@gi70st]

Have your squire fight then. With all the inventory these games let you carry, either your squire is some kind of hulking goliath or you have a whole army of peasants.....who are expendable....and already carrying weapons and armor.

[@santiagoboo3399]

I think that the shield has far more advantages when you are fighting multiple opponents , though.

[@triumphant39]

It basically boils down to get shot with arrows and stones, or be less likely to be shot by arrows and stones. I think Matt is right in terms of individual combat.

[@TheQuinian]

a lot of RPGs, the older ones anyway, would do something like sword = 10 dmg, shield = 10 defense but they don't over lap, or they'd do something like sword +15dmg, sword/shield +10dmg +5def making you actually lose attack points (basically just pure raw power not accounting for technique in the form of skill points or anything) because now you can't 2 hand the sword

[@gawayne1374]

Matt, you don't let me do my homework! But I sure learn a lot ;)

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

That sword looks really nice. I really like it. IDK the look is just so gamey with how shiny it is and I like that. You can also argue that two weapons that complement each other can be a multiplier than just a single weapon. I think rapier and dagger is more of a multiplier(being more than twice effective by complementing each other) than a sword and shield(which reduces the weapon's individual capabilities a little)

[@grandmeleehistoricalfencin3400]

Hello again Matt. Some I haven't heard talked about is the curvature of some shields like the heater shield. Could the use of the curve in the shield be for deflecting incoming blows? And if so could that effect there use in combat. And also the weight of the shield. If it was flat, it would have to be thicker heavy to endure blows. Could the curve in these shields be a way of reducing weight. I would like to hear your thoughts on this

[@pompadour_gagarin1723]

Maybe there is something to say about the "transition" in the (some) italian sources of the 16th century from sword and buckler as the base combo (Marozzo, Manciolino) to single-sword being the entry weapon into a system (Agrippa, Viggiani, dall'Agocchie, Di Grassi). Certainly the civilian context is of importance here but still...

[@brickercustom]

Sword + Shield in a video = + x attack points + x defence points - x stamina points. (that's if that game has a weight as a factor of gameplay.) and you also can't use two/one handed sword for an additional attack bonus.

[@jdzencelowcz]

My one side weapon, if it could only be a sword, would be a longsword with only the last 2 or 3 inches of the tip really sharp, & the rest being blunt enough to handle bare handed. A hard enough hit would still cause damage, maybe not a clean slice, but against soft targets, it would be enough, & I could still do tip cuts. As for hard targets, I would make sure the pommel & quillons are hard & spiked in some way in order to half-sword most effectively.

[@nigelliotta3440]

With two weapons we usually see people using a smaller weapon in their off hand, but what about a boxing-like style of using a longer (while perhaps lighter) thrusting sword in your off (forward) hand and a cutting or cut'n'thrust sword in your power (rear) hand for power strikes?

[@MarshallBanananana]

I guess the value of a shield goes up in a military context (as opposed to a duel), where it's harder to predict a direction from which a threat presents itself.

[@gregoryfloriolli9031]

How would you rank the effectiveness of a sword you wield with two hands, such as a katana, versus sword and shield?

[@BiohazardCrow]

Can you do a video on how to figth if you are injured and you are laying in the ground?

[@rasiabsgamingcorner2258]

I like the idea about the sword and shield arm acting on "oppisite" of each other but I feel that disadvantage is negated when using a epind shield

[@longstrid48]

I makes me warm and fuzzy inside thinking I may have rekt/been rekt by Matt Easton in M&B.

[@SolidBren]

I think grappling an opponent's shield is doable, but is easier said than done. You would have to be very quick and skilled to accomplish a technique like that. I think it is a very dangerous maneuver, because you are exposing an arm to your opponent and the opponent could just cut off your hand/arm if you try to grab. However, if you are wearing gauntlets and armor, grabbing becomes something less risky. I think most would agree that sword and wearing plate armor is much more advantageous than simply sword and shield (no armor). As a side note, I think a sword and pepper spray (or perhaps a jar of irritating chemicals of some kind) would also be a solid weapon combination.

[@ajaxtelamonian5134]

Glad im not the only one who finds sword and buckler difficult.

[@ME-hm7zm]

The pike was in Hammerspace.

[@Dizarrey]

I should think that training someone to use sword and buckler would be more difficult than a sword paired with a kite shield simply because of the difference in use. Using a buckler for defense is much more precise than other shields as it is much smaller. with a kite shield, you can block the entire line of an incoming swing, but with a buckler you pretty much have to defend bang on where the opponent is striking. It seems like a varied thing really.

[@Sutorenja]

goddamn, that's a sexy sword

[@go1988]

I'm not practitioning HEMA so I'm not experienced in fencing but what comes to mind is that the effectivnes of sword vs. sword & shield depends on the situation. I might argue that a fighter with sword & shield is indeed "twice as effective" as a fighter with a sword alone when both have to deal with archers. Again, I have no experience in this, but I imagine that it's easier to close the distance to an opponend who has a weapon with longer reach like a spear when you have a shield.

[@niveaulimbo6101]

Thats a superbeautiful sword

[@LordTytusMandarynka]

Viking centergrip shield for the win. :D You can hold it in front of you without losing the reach of weapon.

[@elirantuil5003]

what about one of those "buckler daggers" that cover the other hand completely? wouldn't that be a lot mor effective?

[@noobgamertr3656]

i have never seen a pummel that big.

[@Arcwelder12]

Would you not have more flexibility with your shield with a vertical centre grip rather that strapped to your arm?

[@remembertostayhydrated]

"A sword can do fewer things, when coupled with a shield" - proceeds to show how he can do everything the sword "cannot do" when one holds a shield, by saying "imagine I don't have a shield". That's why I like Matt).

[@politedog4959]

Hey, Matt, I would like to know your opinion on the daggers/short sword concept of the Moria orcs from Lord of the Rings - on their weapons, the hilt is sort of integrated into/carved out of the blade, which that way goes all the way down to the pommel. Aside from all the rust and dried blood, would this concept be of any practical use, or is it just to difficult to cut with a blade closely 'curved' around your fist (I don't know how to express myself any better :P)? And btw, greetings from Germany and keep up the good stuff!

[@tohopes]

Have you noticed whether drummers are better at fencing with two hands / objects / weapons?

[@digitaljanus]

Drums don't hit back.

[@iopklmification]

But sticks do, and they can hit quite hard, or quite fast rather.

[@gi70st]

i dont think that was the point of the question. The idea that drummers are already practiced in using both hands doing different things at the same time could maybe translate to ease of learning multiple weapon/sword & shield techniques. I think toHopes was looking for confirmation of that concept.

[@Bitteroyster]

@scholagladiatoria Hey Matt! I am really interested in you're Hema school. I was wondering if you have/would do a video maybe just talking about it a bit more and how i could potentially sign up? that would be awesome cheers man.

[@michaelfranco5191]

Can you make a video of types of swords used by Templars and Crusaders?

[@austin1218]

On the subject of RPGs I am trying to make one, and it gives me a headache. Matt I have a question for you about creating rules for duel wielding or fighting with shield and another weapon. I would guess that in either case you could gain either an offensive bonus or a defensive bonus, but not both at the same time. Since you mentioned that it is harder in practice to maneuver two objects, would it be better to say it is harder to try and pull off two different actions at the same time? So for example you could take a defensive action like striking from behind the shield, doing so would impose a penalty on the attack roll since your opponent only has to defend from one side OR you can use your shield to try to control your opponents weapon and get inside his guard, but doing so leaves you slightly more exposed on one side so you would get a penalty on your next defensive roll or perhaps loose the shields benefit the next time you roll. The same would apply for duel wielding but would apply smaller bonuses. In this way the rules for duel wielding or using a shield would be basically the same, either using your offhand tool offensively or defensively but not both, the only difference would be in the bonuses and penalties each type of fighting would confer. Would this make sense?

[@prechabahnglai103]

Centre grip shield would do better in this situaltion I think, you can extend it further.

[@StygianEmperor]

Pillars of Eternity gives you an accuracy bonus if you use a single one-handed weapon alone.

[@stepover12]

10:50 "There are things you can do with your left hand, it's not a useless object" *smile* Yes, tell us more what else you have in mind ;D

[@Perkustin]

Hi Matt, big fan of your informative and entertaining videos, i noticed that, like myself, you eschew the term 'melee' when referring to hand to hand fighting or hand/close-combat weapons. Is this a conscious decision? (As it is in my case; i view it as a redundant, lazy and well, un-descriptive, descriptor). For some reason It reminds me of people calling 'patent trawling' patent 'trolling' these days haha.

[@willinnewhaven3285]

Even if the shield-user doesn't have an advantage against the two-hander, the shield gives protection against other possible attackers on a battlefield. Unless you have armor that lets you (nearly) ignore arrows, you are better off with the shield.

[@james-uk]

Hi Matt. What have you edged the shield with, it looks more like rubber than raw hide? I'm making two Viking shields and wondering what to do when it comes to the edging.

[@feelz_4_dayz885]

2:00 welcome to skyrim matt

[@casonastudios1228]

hi, Really nice Video, but are the used Sword and Shield out of the same Time-Period? The Shield looks earlier to me.

[@kevinshepardson1628]

How much of the sword-and-shield or other two-weapon set of techniques requires independent action by the two weapons? I'm recalling my limited unarmed martial arts training, and can certainly attest that trying to split your attention between two simultaneous tasks is very difficult, especially without training (the style I was learning made use of simultaneous high and low attacks, which are horrendous to try and defend against), but also that many tasks require both arms. In some ways, it was actually easier using both hands in a technique (for example, parrying a blow with one hand and countering with the other) than keeping one hand idle while the other acts. Are there many styles that account for this, giving both weapons something to do as part of the same technique, or is it more trying to combine two parallel technique sets for the two weapons?

[@JnSobre]

Role play games should add the gripper-hand skill

[@heirofsolaire2195]

What blade length would you typically use with a kite shield?

[@kuro_kishi]

I think Matt, what you did miss out on is the TYPE of swords that work well with shields, and which swords would not work well. Like longswords for example, works best if you have it alone, as it's purpose is designated for two handed use (offense and defense from the crossguard, like parrying).

[@umartdagnir]

You might be right if we're speaking about a duel, but it's completely different if we're speaking about a fight in a formation, when your arm movements are restricted. In this case a shield is essential. Imagine a line of soldiers with shields and swords/spears vs. a line of soldiers with just their weapons. The latter are basically defenceless.

[@danielchalmers9815]

i'm always so worried when you swing the swords around and talk at the same time, i keep thinking your going to cut your ear off.

[@errorrishe]

One important thing about big shields - they SHINE in group fights.

[@lrichard1687]

what sword is that, its very nice

[@Nix6p]

Regarding your comments about having the left or right foot forward with a shield, it really depends on individual style. In the SCA the traditional stance is shield-forward, but sword-forward is really getting popular in some groups. It also depends a lot on the shield. With something very defensive like that kite shield, it really doesn't lend itself to a sword-forward stance. When it comes to the idea of it being hard to learn two weapons because you're splitting your attention, I've found it's very different with a shield to an edged weapon. You don't necessarily treat a shield as a separate weapon like you would with a dagger or a second sword, you treat your sword&shield more like a single weapon broken into two parts. What I'm trying to get at is that they're not operating under separate tempos - they have the same tempo and work together for every movement. That's the same reason why you can't just directly adapt single-sword techniques to work with a shield (or vice-versa).