Conquest of the Horde

This really only pertains to those who play as Blademasters. But in Cata, the warrior trainer (Ronakada) is a blademaster. But that's not the reason I'm bringing up. Turns out he duel-wields (I know, the picture doesn't show the swords). And so, (Solely based on the fact that this NPC does, don't take this for cannon.) Blademasters can duel-wield single handed swords. Thought it might be cool to post this up and see what others might think about this feat.

Screenshots.

I was always aware of this, but never have I liked it, personally. Mostly because of WC3's models. /shrug

Who said Blademasters can't dual wield? If you would've read the comics with Varian then you'd find out that Varian ends up fighting a Blademaster, the Blademaster is also dual wielding two big swords.

Well I considered it more of an unsaid rule. No blademaster I've seen has ever had a second weapon so I figured they could only single-wield.

Neahh~ They are BladeMASTERS for a reason. But afterall a nice find for the ones that didn't realise this. Good job!

I... ah.

My mind is shattered by the idea that blademasters can have two swords.

I always find it funny that player feel the need to copy models in WC3. Just because the Blademaster in WC3 wields a two handed sword does not mean all do, Who knows there may be a blade master out there that favors axes, or even daggers. The same applies for Demon slayers. I'm sure not every demon slayer strictly wields Warglaives (or whatever they are called). Some may use strictly swords, axes, clubs, or a mixture there of.

In my opinion, a player is really only limited by there imaginations... and house rules of course.

Keep in mind I have not read into CoTH house rules for these classes so don't beat me down to much for my ignorance.

What requiem said.

(06-15-2012, 12:12 PM)requiem225 Wrote: [ -> ]I always find it funny that player feel the need to copy models in WC3. Just because the Blademaster in WC3 wields a two handed sword does not mean all do, Who knows there may be a blade master out there that favors axes, or even daggers. The same applies for Demon slayers. I'm sure not every demon slayer strictly wields Warglaives (or whatever they are called). Some may use strictly swords, axes, clubs, or a mixture there of.

In my opinion, a player is really only limited by there imaginations... and house rules of course.

Keep in mind I have not read into CoTH house rules for these classes so don't beat me down to much for my ignorance.

Funnily enough, some pictures show Demon Hunters in spiky armor, wielding double-ended polearms. Others show them with their eyes intact, wielding two bloody swords:

Well, a Blademaster is just that-- a master of blades. They learn to utilize all forms of bladed combat, I'd think. They aren't really limited because to them, it's an art. They probably can duel-wield, throw weapons, polearms, axes, all of that...

(06-17-2012, 02:45 PM)Aphetoros Wrote: [ -> ]Well, a Blademaster is just that-- a master of blades. They learn to utilize all forms of bladed combat, I'd think. They aren't really limited because to them, it's an art. They probably can duel-wield, throw weapons, polearms, axes, all of that...

Most of that makes sense, except for the throwing. Why throw something when you can just run to em at almost the same speed and hack and slash all you want?

But hey, I think it would be interesting to see a Blademaster with differing weapons no? Each time they fight they go into batle with a new sword or axe, and a new style to fight with.

(06-17-2012, 03:41 PM)KageAcuma Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-17-2012, 02:45 PM)Aphetoros Wrote: [ -> ]Well, a Blademaster is just that-- a master of blades. They learn to utilize all forms of bladed combat, I'd think. They aren't really limited because to them, it's an art. They probably can duel-wield, throw weapons, polearms, axes, all of that...

Most of that makes sense, except for the throwing. Why throw something when you can just run to em at almost the same speed and hack and slash all you want?

Because you can be hacked and slashed back, if you're up close. From afar, they can't reach you.

(06-17-2012, 03:42 PM)flammos200 Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-17-2012, 03:41 PM)KageAcuma Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-17-2012, 02:45 PM)Aphetoros Wrote: [ -> ]Well, a Blademaster is just that-- a master of blades. They learn to utilize all forms of bladed combat, I'd think. They aren't really limited because to them, it's an art. They probably can duel-wield, throw weapons, polearms, axes, all of that...

Most of that makes sense, except for the throwing. Why throw something when you can just run to em at almost the same speed and hack and slash all you want?

Because you can be hacked and slashed back, if you're up close. From afar, they can't reach you.

Yet that's what Blademasters do. They charge into the thickest part of the battle and proceed to hack and slash, their sashimono waving and signaling where the largest fight is.

Quote:Blademasters lead their people into melee, unhesitatingly seeking the most vulnerable enemy champions — mages, druids, and the like. They willingly go toe-to-toe with other melee experts as well, drawing from ages of tradition to fuel their combat prowess. Their sashimono allow their troops to identify them on the battlefield and move to where the action is thickest. Many act as bodyguards for other Horde champions.

(A quote from Wowpedia)

Random request: I would love if thread titles were utilized in a manner that clearly relayed the contents of the thread. "Something cool." doesn't tell me anything!

That said, it's logical that blademasters should be able to do so. I find that most restrictions tend to be a little effusive. That said, I can understand why people tend to rely so heavily on what the franchise portrays. Too often we run into situations where we're told that something isn't possible or that an idea doesn't make sense because there's no representation of it within any game, story, or comic. The sword swings both ways.

I think that it's important to make reasonable leaps of logic in these situations than automatically discard a premise because it isn't specifically shown.