Use two sword at the same time ?

[Stephen Andkow]

Is there a mod for that ? . I'm talking about have two swords (one handed) and use it at the same time.

[Reverend Belial]

No, I don't think the code allows that. There are(is a) mods(mod) that add in shields with sword models, but I don't think there are any actual dual-wielding mods.

[Tuidjy]

To attack with your off hand... no, its been a long time since you could do that in Mount and Blade.

But there mods with offhand swords and daggers that can be used for parrying. Off the top of my head, there is Suvarnabhumi Mahayuth and a submod to Gekokujo.

[sergio1185]

hi there can you tell wich submod to install to have it?

[Dobrutro]

Dual-wielding? Its fantasy story, in human history nobody use such technique in combat - because it sux. Just better grab weapon in two hands and use more power strike to break enemy parrying or crush his shield.

[JtDarth]

Originally posted by Dobrutro:

Dual-wielding? Its fantasy story, in human history nobody use such technique in combat - because it sux. Just better grab weapon in two hands and use more power strike to break enemy parrying or crush his shield.

Says someone who clearly has no knowledge whatsoever of historical combat. There are so many issues with your statement that I don't really know where to start without resulting in an essay.

Originally posted by Tuidjy:

To attack with your off hand... no, its been a long time since you could do that in Mount and Blade.

But there mods with offhand swords and daggers that can be used for parrying. Off the top of my head, there is Suvarnabhumi Mahayuth and a submod to Gekokujo.

Phantasy calradia has off hand swords / daggers as shields, and quite a few mods allow you to use stuff like Lyres and Lutes as shields.

[Inardesco]

Wielding 2 swords of the same length at a time wasn't historically used. However, there are manuscripts that show dual wielding a sword with a shorter sword or a dagger. With the shorter weapon being used to parry and the longer weapon used to strike.

[JtDarth]

Originally posted by Viridis:

Wielding 2 swords of the same length at a time wasn't historically used. However, there are manuscripts that show dual wielding a sword with a shorter sword or a dagger. With the shorter weapon being used to parry and the longer weapon used to strike.

Depends on timeframe and type of battle. Look up the term 'case of swords' for an example of identical swords being used.
Just because it wasn't advised or was not poplar/efficient doesn't mean it wasn't done. When dealing with rapiers or something like a light cutlass/sabre or scimitar, there is literally no reason you couldn't do it. Even using something like an arming sword wouldn't be too out of line, provided the blade was of a good balance and weight. Even using two handaxes is entirely possible.
As to the 'shorter weapon being used to parry and the larger being used to strike'? No, just no. Striking (more specifically thrusting) with a shorter blade to follow up to a strike with the normal blade or to take advantage of a gap in the opponent's defense was very much a thing. When the opponent has to block you, that moves their own weapon / guarding implement out of position, leaving them open to a quick attack by your other weapon.
Take a look into left handed swordsmen, and you will find that many of them were very good at what they did solely because they were rare enough that their opponents had a hard time adapting to the different blade position. The same is true for using 2 swords. A left handed warrior would utterly ruin a roman or greek shield wall.
To use 2 identical swords, you would have to be effectively ambidextrous, but it is still quite possible.

[Jirki88]

Originally posted by DarthNachoz:

Originally posted by Viridis:

Wielding 2 swords of the same length at a time wasn't historically used. However, there are manuscripts that show dual wielding a sword with a shorter sword or a dagger. With the shorter weapon being used to parry and the longer weapon used to strike.

Depends on timeframe and type of battle. Look up the term 'case of swords' for an example of identical swords being used.
Just because it wasn't advised or was not poplar/efficient doesn't mean it wasn't done. When dealing with rapiers or something like a light cutlass/sabre or scimitar, there is literally no reason you couldn't do it. Even using something like an arming sword wouldn't be too out of line, provided the blade was of a good balance and weight. Even using two handaxes is entirely possible.
As to the 'shorter weapon being used to parry and the larger being used to strike'? No, just no. Striking (more specifically thrusting) with a shorter blade to follow up to a strike with the normal blade or to take advantage of a gap in the opponent's defense was very much a thing. When the opponent has to block you, that moves their own weapon / guarding implement out of position, leaving them open to a quick attack by your other weapon.
Take a look into left handed swordsmen, and you will find that many of them were very good at what they did solely because they were rare enough that their opponents had a hard time adapting to the different blade position. The same is true for using 2 swords. A left handed warrior would utterly ruin a roman or greek shield wall.
To use 2 identical swords, you would have to be effectively ambidextrous, but it is still quite possible.

Dual Wielding was however at most a very rare thing in history, aside of in martial arts. Just because there were rare cases where it happened dont mean it would be particularly reasonable to implement it in a game that strives for a historical feel. Besides, while dual-wielding could have been useful in fencing or 1-on-1-combat on occasion, it would never fit in any kind of formation fighting.

[Inardesco]

What I say is a no?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xc8akxwI56s

[JtDarth]

Originally posted by Jirki88:

Originally posted by DarthNachoz:

Depends on timeframe and type of battle. Look up the term 'case of swords' for an example of identical swords being used.
Just because it wasn't advised or was not poplar/efficient doesn't mean it wasn't done. When dealing with rapiers or something like a light cutlass/sabre or scimitar, there is literally no reason you couldn't do it. Even using something like an arming sword wouldn't be too out of line, provided the blade was of a good balance and weight. Even using two handaxes is entirely possible.
As to the 'shorter weapon being used to parry and the larger being used to strike'? No, just no. Striking (more specifically thrusting) with a shorter blade to follow up to a strike with the normal blade or to take advantage of a gap in the opponent's defense was very much a thing. When the opponent has to block you, that moves their own weapon / guarding implement out of position, leaving them open to a quick attack by your other weapon.
Take a look into left handed swordsmen, and you will find that many of them were very good at what they did solely because they were rare enough that their opponents had a hard time adapting to the different blade position. The same is true for using 2 swords. A left handed warrior would utterly ruin a roman or greek shield wall.
To use 2 identical swords, you would have to be effectively ambidextrous, but it is still quite possible.

Dual Wielding was however at most a very rare thing in history, aside of in martial arts. Just because there were rare cases where it happened dont mean it would be particularly reasonable to implement it in a game that strives for a historical feel. Besides, while dual-wielding could have been useful in fencing or 1-on-1-combat on occasion, it would never fit in any kind of formation fighting.

Keep in mind that not all groups practiced traditional formation fighting. Indeed, quite a few of the more famous bands of mercenaries were famous because they did things differently. The OP was also not asking for it in the original game, but whether there were mods that had it.
My responses where more tailored toward the people claiming that it 100% did not happen. Which is clearly not the case.
The prevalence of multi-weapon fighting varies quite heavily depending on timeframe, and on whether the people involved were fighting traditional fights. Pirates, Thieves, bandits, and all kinds of other fighters who didn't fight for government were well-known for unorthodox fighting, including using things as weapons that shouldn't be, or straight up dual wielding.
Your comment on martial arts is amusing to me, btw. What do you think the martial arts were used for in antiquity? They were used for combat, with many forms being adapted specifically to large scale battles, and others remaining the province of skirmishers, scouts, and assasins.

[JtDarth]

Originally posted by Viridis:

What I say is a no?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xc8akxwI56s

According to the video you yourself linked, dual-wielding was a thing, just not very common, and usually done either with shorter swords or specific types. They specifically show the dagger being used to strike after blocking or parrying with the longer blade multiple times, which clearly contradicts your own statement. They are also almost explicitly covering dagger and rapier, and not other technicques or ideologies. I love when people link sources and don't even bother to pay attention to them.

[Inardesco]

I never said dual wielding wasn't a thing. I said that dual wielding using swords of the same length wasn't a thing. Read correctly before replying cuz what you state, is exactly what I said, though with lesser words.

You first "debunked" my first comment, and now in your latest reply, you're essentially saying the same as my first comment. Get your act straight would you.

[JtDarth]

Originally posted by Viridis:

I never said dual wielding wasn't a thing. I said that dual wielding using swords of the same length wasn't a thing. Read correctly before replying cuz what you state, is exactly what I said, though with lesser words.

You can in fact dual wield swords of the same length. Your own source shows one of them doing it with rapiers, and showing correct stance for utilizing both. Rapiers are still swords, as are arming swords, Gladius, or any number of form of shorter sword.
For all intents and purposes, unless it is a proper two-handed longsword (IE one either not balanced for one handed use or too large for such) you can in theory wield one in each hand. It was not a common thing, and something seen more commonly amongst duelists and other such groups than amongst true soldiers, it was still a thing, and as such, is historical. The reasons that that method of fighting was not common is because in a full battle, the worry of arrows and formations created negatives to the method, not to mention the fact that to properly use identical weapons, you have to specifically train yourself to be good with that weapon in either hand, and from there to obtain the proper mindset required to adapt to using two weapons.

Something many forget about HEMA groups is that they tend to focus on what Professional soldiers were taught and used frequently. The stuff that made it into training manuals becasue it was general purpose. They don't cover more unique or difficult forms of combat, which includes a lot of self taught tricks, that were never written down in a manual.
That aside, the numbers in use in Mount and Blade are small enough that duelling techniques and other such esoteric and out of the ordinary techniques would in fact be seen on the field. FFS some of the potentially strongest units available in vanilla mount and blade are not professional soldiers, but completely untrained docters, engineers, and others like that, with no formal combat training. You can, if you want, even roll nothing but a few companions and a legion of bandits.
Dual-wielding (of equal weapons) was not taught by drill instructors, but that doesn't mean it wasn't used, or that it wasn't effective, for that matter. What was taught to soldiers was the things that were both effective, and quick to pick up.
There are a number of different martial arts that involve a pair of equal weapons, and those martial arts are intended for FIGHTING. There is literally no solid barrier to adapting, say, a cutting based martial art using short swords, to take advantage of longer blades.
As for thosse claiming that it isn't historical in the context of Mount and Blade, keep in mind that Mount and blade has representatives of Asian culture (The Khergits, who draw directly from the mongols) and representitives of far eastern Europe as well, (the Vaegirs are based as far as I can tell, anyway, on various slavic cultures), and even middle eastern (the sarranids).

[Jirki88]

Originally posted by DarthNachoz:

Originally posted by Jirki88:

Dual Wielding was however at most a very rare thing in history, aside of in martial arts. Just because there were rare cases where it happened dont mean it would be particularly reasonable to implement it in a game that strives for a historical feel. Besides, while dual-wielding could have been useful in fencing or 1-on-1-combat on occasion, it would never fit in any kind of formation fighting.

Keep in mind that not all groups practiced traditional formation fighting. Indeed, quite a few of the more famous bands of mercenaries were famous because they did things differently. The OP was also not asking for it in the original game, but whether there were mods that had it.
My responses where more tailored toward the people claiming that it 100% did not happen. Which is clearly not the case.
The prevalence of multi-weapon fighting varies quite heavily depending on timeframe, and on whether the people involved were fighting traditional fights. Pirates, Thieves, bandits, and all kinds of other fighters who didn't fight for government were well-known for unorthodox fighting, including using things as weapons that shouldn't be, or straight up dual wielding.
Your comment on martial arts is amusing to me, btw. What do you think the martial arts were used for in antiquity? They were used for combat, with many forms being adapted specifically to large scale battles, and others remaining the province of skirmishers, scouts, and assasins.

Nah, most of those martial arts were more for competitive or 'philosophical' purposes rather than for warfare.

[JtDarth]

Originally posted by Jirki88:

Originally posted by DarthNachoz:

Keep in mind that not all groups practiced traditional formation fighting. Indeed, quite a few of the more famous bands of mercenaries were famous because they did things differently. The OP was also not asking for it in the original game, but whether there were mods that had it.
My responses where more tailored toward the people claiming that it 100% did not happen. Which is clearly not the case.
The prevalence of multi-weapon fighting varies quite heavily depending on timeframe, and on whether the people involved were fighting traditional fights. Pirates, Thieves, bandits, and all kinds of other fighters who didn't fight for government were well-known for unorthodox fighting, including using things as weapons that shouldn't be, or straight up dual wielding.
Your comment on martial arts is amusing to me, btw. What do you think the martial arts were used for in antiquity? They were used for combat, with many forms being adapted specifically to large scale battles, and others remaining the province of skirmishers, scouts, and assasins.

Nah, most of those martial arts were more for competitive or 'philosophical' purposes rather than for warfare.

Even if developed for 'competitive or philosophical reasons' each and every martial art is easily adapted for combat, otherwise the martial part would not be there.

What part of warfare is dependent on scale escapes people? For smaller groups based on rapid engagement and disengagement, who aren't dependent on solid formations and indeed, are not involving themselves in those larger battles, many unorthodox tactics that would be a problem in a larger field battle are quite usable. Robin hood's merry men are a good example of such a group, even if they are fictional. They were not a professional group, and it's members were from all walks of life, with a wide variety of skills, who relied on ambushes and shocktactics.
And as I apparently must repeat myself, just because it isn't prevalent on a major battlefield does not mean it never occured as people keep claiming.