no banana@lemmy.world to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 months agoflanged rulelemmy.worldimagemessage-square52fedilinkarrow-up1259arrow-down10
arrow-up1259arrow-down1imageflanged rulelemmy.worldno banana@lemmy.world to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 months agomessage-square52fedilink
minus-squareDragonTypeWyvernlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·8 months agoGood for multiple opponents sure sounds like you actually mean “good for putting down peasant revolts where they’re both underarmed and unarmored”
minus-squareAussiemandeus@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up3·8 months agoMore so for defending yourself against multiple people or holding a bridge head
minus-squareDragonTypeWyvernlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·8 months agoThe only time a fighter can be assumed to win with even 2 to 1 odds is with a significant material and training advantage. And they’d still be better off with a weapon that isn’t a gimmick.
minus-squareAussiemandeus@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up1·8 months agoOh you so mighty and knowledgeable in the martial arts teach us your wisdom
minus-squareDragonTypeWyvernlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·8 months agoSure thing. A good big man beats a good small man. Two men beat one man. You’re welcome buddy.
Good for multiple opponents sure sounds like you actually mean “good for putting down peasant revolts where they’re both underarmed and unarmored”
More so for defending yourself against multiple people or holding a bridge head
The only time a fighter can be assumed to win with even 2 to 1 odds is with a significant material and training advantage. And they’d still be better off with a weapon that isn’t a gimmick.
Oh you so mighty and knowledgeable in the martial arts teach us your wisdom
Sure thing.
A good big man beats a good small man.
Two men beat one man.
You’re welcome buddy.