Tell me how a man with two swords might defeat the man with a shield and sword

Tell me how a man with two swords might defeat the man with a shield and sword.

It seems impossible, lest the shield man is an untrained fool.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=dkhpqAGdZPc
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>swords
Cut even cut maille.

Ah, but what if, perchance, the shield-man suffers from leprosy, and his rotten shield-arm chooses to leave his mortal frame at the height of battle, thus rendering him weak and unmanly to the two-sword man's rigid thrust?

End him rightly

Grip second sword by blade, and use the guard to hook the shield of thine enemy, pulling him off balance. Stab him with the second sword while he recovers.

Because he has TWO SWORDS. You can do anything with TWO SWORDS. Shank two niggas at once. Shank one nigga twice. With TWO SWORDS you're basically unstoppable.

Shields aren't actually for pussies though.

A shield is heavier than a sword. Therefore, if the dual-wielder can drag out the fight, the guy whose passivity has been engendered will get tired more quickly, at which point the dual-wielder can exploit gaps in his defense and win.

but by flailing around like an ape dual wielding you;ve also tired yourself out

Throw one of the swords up in a way that will make it fall down on the guy with shield, forcing him to choose between covering himself from the sword that is going to fall down and stab his head or defend from his opponents attacks

Both combatants are "flailing around". That's what combat is.
Using a shield doesn't mean you just sit there and hold up the shield whenever an attack looms. The shield-wielder will be using his shield to bash and feint, just as the sword-wielder will be using his shield to slash, thrust, and feint. (Also, just raising and lowering the shield for defense takes energy as well, even if it isn't used for offense.)

>just as the sword-wielder will be using his shield
*his second sword

Yes, it's impossible

There many types of shields that are far lighter than swords.

Well, then, it depends on the setting situation. Blame OP for being too vague.

I still think the best bet is using your second sword like an axe and hooking your enemies shield like said

aim at the destruction of the shieldmans sword even at the cost of one of your own. then, having a second, a sidearm, you are in a superior position. attrition is your friend when you possess superior numbers.

why are you using a sword and not spear like a god damn pleb?

How do you destroy a sword with another sword? All can think of is repeatedly hitting the thing until both dull, but if the dude has a shield he ain't gonna be blocking with his blade.

>sword
>giant hunk of expensively-crafted metal
>spear
>thin stick of cheap wood with just a little bit of cheap metal at the end
I think the spear is the plebeian's weapon, user.

youtube.com/watch?v=dkhpqAGdZPc

The man with two swords sneaks up behind the man with a shield and stabs him.

Twice.

HEMAfag here. I do sidesword, with all the off-hands. Even a second sword.
It's doable. There are a few strategies.
The weapon is more dangerous than the shield. Occupy that. Generally attacking with a shield requires closing to grappling range, and you have the advantage there because it's more difficult to drop a shield for wrestling.

Buy yourself some time. He literally can't hold the shield forever. Shields work by holding them in front of you, and by shutting off a line of attack. But they also close that line for themselves. It's easier to defend attacks from shields because they can only attack left from really high, unless they do something dumb like flipping the shield to the other side.
This means most attacks will be from the right, and thrusts.

You can circle around the shield to the opponent's right. You still have to deal with the weapon. But if you can bind it with your left hand weapon, then step right to attack the opponent, you will find an opening.

You can close to grappling. Shutting off the opponent's options entirely can really work to your advantage. But your opponent also knows this.

Throw one sword and charge. Anything to distract or stun the opponent could be helpful, and timed well, this may work.

There are specific things to do, but that gets into jargon and it's not helpful for Veeky Forums.
You pretty much have to hold a shield out to make it useful. Certainly you can hold it close if someone's far out of measure. But just outside of measure, and in measure, you need to hold it out. People tire quickly with the Rotella that we practice with. So much so that we also use it for conditioning.

OP didn't say buckler. OP did say shield.
Swords are more useful than spears. I regularly pit my sidesword skills against staffs, and given that we have limits in sparring (full power attacks with the staff being barred of course, because you can literally break a neck with that), I do very well.

Cut his unprotected sword arm. The beauty of this plan? It doesn't matter whether he's a righty or a lefty, because you have a sword for either case.

Man with the shield take 2 less damage, but sword has attack of 5. Dual swords gives more DPS even after shield. E z

>heavy

>OP didn't say buckler. OP did say shield

OP also provided an image of a shield.
OP also said shield.

Swords are heavy, trying to whip two around would probably be difficult and awkward. It's a fun trope in fiction but it's not terribly realistic.

Beat the shield
Stab the face

I was gonna say exactly all this. Good job user, you have put good information on the internet.

I'll add that between two lesser-skilled fighters, the shield is usually an advantage. Between two very skilled fighters it becomes more about personal skill than weapon choice in this instance.

two attacks a round are statistically more likely to beat even an improved AC

>halfswording with one hand
Good way for the sword to slip from your hand and cut you. You need two hands on the blade to apply leverage and prevent it from slicing you

You have no honor!