Which is stupider, fighting with a double-ended sword or twin spears?

Which is stupider, fighting with a double-ended sword or twin spears?

Being OP

Spears with two tips aren't exactly unusual. And fighting with two javelines is basically a "shit, I don't have a proper shield, better turn those javelines with the javelines I'm holding in my off-hand!"-type situation.

When you say twin spears do you mean a double weapon like your pic or just two spears? I guess in either case the spears would probably be better, though in the case of using two spears it's probably a closer match

Since even one end of that sword is so unbalanced and heavy it really doesn't matter. At least a spear makes sense.

Two spears.

What if it was more like a Bat'leth?

Depends entirely on if you mean twin spears as in holding a spear in each hand, or having a spear with a point on each end.
The first would be extremly awkward and ungainly and probably not a good idea. The second is pretty much standard. Most spears intended for combat (as opposed to hunting) have at a bladed head one one end and a pointed cap on the other. The purpose of this mostly practical, it prevents the butt from being damaged, lets you stick it in the ground to free your hands to get something out of your pack or whatever and makes it easier to brace the weapon against the ground... but in a pinch it can of course be used offensively as well.

>Spears with two tips aren't exactly unusual.

They are in reality. I'm sure you can dig up one somewhere, but they sure as hell weren't common.

>What if it was more like a Bat'leth?

Somewhat different flavour of fucking stupid.

>They are in reality. I'm sure you can dig up one somewhere, but they sure as hell weren't common.

Not him, but for instance, every Greek hoplite or their successor Macedonian style phalangite (sp?) would have a two tipped spears, and they were pretty militarily influential.

>I'm sure you can dig up one somewhere

i like klingons but the bat'leth always reminded me of something out of a Bud K catalog

From what I recall, training manuals explicitly told cavalrymen to stab with whichever point was closer to their target.

...

You can have a sword with two points but you'd basically just fight with it like a normal spear, then if one point broke you could use the other

Double ended swords on the other hand would be an actually require the person to fight completely differently

>Implying there's anything wrong with twin spears
LANCE TWO SARACENS AT ONCE
LANCE ONE SARACEN TWICE
DEUS VULT

...

Fighting with two shields. I had a player desperately want to take two Tower Shields, with sharpened bottoms and use one to guard himself while swinging the other one up and around to cut people.

It took a good 30 minutes to tell him that he couldn't do that.

lemme guess, he sperged on about dark souls whenever possible?

No, he actually tried to argue that the since the Spartans were trained to be able to use their shields to full effect in combat that it wouldn't be unreasonable for him to be able to use two shields in place of a shield and spear.

Eventually we just told him that that would be an Improvised weapon at best, and only do 1d4 damage. Dude was pissed

i would have asked if he would compromise by settling for being able to use a two handed dagger.

Twin spears is less stupid.

Throw one spear and fight with the other, good range.

Double ended swords are unweildly and have worse range than a normal sword.

I'm assuming single combat, but out side of that I'll still go double spear.

*stands in your way*

>What if it was more like a Bat'leth?

Bat'leths are the dumbest weapons in all of fiction.

Whoever used O must have been a real-life boss fight. I don't understand the point of N, though.

>Implying fighting with twin spears is stupid
OP is speaking farts.

>Spears and Javelins are now the same thing.