This is something that's come up in FC chatter/mumble for a while, now, especially with our FotM hype nerds. The general consensus seems to be that all tanks will be going for Dark Knight soon or something. I still don't personally see why. Mechanically Paladins are probably the strongest tank in the game between the abundance of cooldowns and passive block being so powerful. Where Paladins suffer the most is in solo play where their dps is abysmally low and the one ability they have, Sword Oath, is the longest running joke of 2.x
If Dark Knight comes in and offers all the cooldown versatility and massive secondary mitigation of Paladin with the AoE threat and solo DPS of the Warrior? Then yes you will probably see a lot of people jumping ship to board the hype train. Of course this could easily be fixed by redoing sword oath to not be garbage and increasing the AoE threat of Paladin while also giving warrior something to compensate for their lack of a block passive.
Overall where this really matters is in raiding. If Dark Knight doesn't have the passive mitigation and cooldown versatility of Paladin I'm going to put my money on Paladin staying the strongest tank with Warrior and Dark Knight being interchangeable as Off Tanks.
On to the RP side of things!
So here's the thing with greatswords: Fantasy games have played up their prominence and capability to an extreme degree. That is not to say that a great sword isn't good at what it's intended to do: cleaving a bloody swathe through unarmored foes and the legs of horses.Â
Like all jobs it is good to remember that there is a tool for every job. You're not going to bring a pair of pliers to a decking job when you need a hammer and nails, instead.Â
What does that mean for warfare and combat? Well it means that there is no "one tool fixes all" in melee warfare which is why there are so many different weapons throughout history. Some of them are good or even great, some of them are terrible and beg the question: -WHY?!-. Greatswords tend to be the marriage of a long cutting edge of a long sword or a messer sword, with the chopping force of a long axe. Some might argue that you could throw short spear in there but I disagree on the basis of how a spear is wielded and a greatsword is still shorter than a short spear; unless they mean javelins in which case you don't throw the damn greatsword gdi.
With that in mind, if you're fighting a bunch of opponents that have light or no armor or cavalry then a greatsword is excellent. Greatsword blades don't cut through solid or well made metal armor, however, since the cutting edge is spread out over too much space to penetrate your opponent. CAN you defeat an armored foe with a greatsword? Of course, but you can also kill someone with a broken bottle, too, it doesn't make it the best tool for the job.
On to swords and shields. The shield as a concept has been around in practice from some of the most ancient civilizations like the Egyptian wood and ox hide shields to the famous Roman Scutum and the Viking Linden board round shields then moving on to modern day riot shields. The idea of putting a solid barrier between yourself and direct harm is something I think all of us can get behind (see what I did there?). A shield wasn't just a defensive barrier that took up a spot on your arm and occasionally absorbed an arrow shot, rather it was a solid wall between your enemy's weapon and your body, a mobile and often maneuverable shell that could block, parry, and especially trap an opponents weapon, and an effective bashing weapon. One of the most effective shield combinations is a medium sized shield, usually round or rectangular, and a short sword (Like the gladius). Even more so if you can present a shield wall to your enemies and arm your soldiers with spears as well, i.e. the phalanx.
Though I think we're supposedly focusing on one-on-one combat. I could probably present pages of scenarios to you about sword-and-shield vs. greatsword and what is better etc etc. I think someone mentioned HEMA earlier, too, and they'll know what I'm talking about in that regard. I will say that just 'off the cuff' in my opinion with two equally skilled and armored opponents you will likely see the person with the sword and shield overcoming the greatsword wielder more often just because that shield is a highly effective and adaptable tool while a greatsword only does one thing, maybe two if you count the occasional parry.
On a somewhat personal peeve I will say that I very often see this idea touted about with characters wielding this massive greatswords with relative ease and the thing is wide enough that they claim they just plant it in the ground and it can block arrows and even BULLETS. I will grant that this is Final Fantasy so ridiculous and fantastical things can and do happen like Cloud for example. HOWEVER since we have 'normal' looking swords with most of them being proportional as the majority I'm going to say that a cloud sword is just sort of ridiculous as a notion. Hell even I find Raubahn's swords to be too big and heavy to be using effectively with one in each hand. But regardless, using a sword as a shield just seems ridiculous even for FF. Plus it sounds like a good way to get your sword broken and/or shattered since it's not designed to take those kinds of impacts (small high velocity shots) on the flat. Not to mention that it's heavy and unwieldy! There's a video of a guy who made a replica of Cloud's Buster Sword and then had some body builder try to swing it around and he just couldn't do it, it weight like 50-60 pounds (a normal greatsword weighs probably 4-5). Finally, with such a large weapon your range of strikes is rather limited to downwards chops and horizontal cuts. You might get a thrust in but remember, it's not a spear. A one handed sword just has a lot more flexibility, range of motion, penetrating power if you half-sword especially, and would be faster. I know it's Final Fantasy but I just dislike the anime greatsword trope e.e
If Dark Knight comes in and offers all the cooldown versatility and massive secondary mitigation of Paladin with the AoE threat and solo DPS of the Warrior? Then yes you will probably see a lot of people jumping ship to board the hype train. Of course this could easily be fixed by redoing sword oath to not be garbage and increasing the AoE threat of Paladin while also giving warrior something to compensate for their lack of a block passive.
Overall where this really matters is in raiding. If Dark Knight doesn't have the passive mitigation and cooldown versatility of Paladin I'm going to put my money on Paladin staying the strongest tank with Warrior and Dark Knight being interchangeable as Off Tanks.
On to the RP side of things!
So here's the thing with greatswords: Fantasy games have played up their prominence and capability to an extreme degree. That is not to say that a great sword isn't good at what it's intended to do: cleaving a bloody swathe through unarmored foes and the legs of horses.Â
Like all jobs it is good to remember that there is a tool for every job. You're not going to bring a pair of pliers to a decking job when you need a hammer and nails, instead.Â
What does that mean for warfare and combat? Well it means that there is no "one tool fixes all" in melee warfare which is why there are so many different weapons throughout history. Some of them are good or even great, some of them are terrible and beg the question: -WHY?!-. Greatswords tend to be the marriage of a long cutting edge of a long sword or a messer sword, with the chopping force of a long axe. Some might argue that you could throw short spear in there but I disagree on the basis of how a spear is wielded and a greatsword is still shorter than a short spear; unless they mean javelins in which case you don't throw the damn greatsword gdi.
With that in mind, if you're fighting a bunch of opponents that have light or no armor or cavalry then a greatsword is excellent. Greatsword blades don't cut through solid or well made metal armor, however, since the cutting edge is spread out over too much space to penetrate your opponent. CAN you defeat an armored foe with a greatsword? Of course, but you can also kill someone with a broken bottle, too, it doesn't make it the best tool for the job.
On to swords and shields. The shield as a concept has been around in practice from some of the most ancient civilizations like the Egyptian wood and ox hide shields to the famous Roman Scutum and the Viking Linden board round shields then moving on to modern day riot shields. The idea of putting a solid barrier between yourself and direct harm is something I think all of us can get behind (see what I did there?). A shield wasn't just a defensive barrier that took up a spot on your arm and occasionally absorbed an arrow shot, rather it was a solid wall between your enemy's weapon and your body, a mobile and often maneuverable shell that could block, parry, and especially trap an opponents weapon, and an effective bashing weapon. One of the most effective shield combinations is a medium sized shield, usually round or rectangular, and a short sword (Like the gladius). Even more so if you can present a shield wall to your enemies and arm your soldiers with spears as well, i.e. the phalanx.
Though I think we're supposedly focusing on one-on-one combat. I could probably present pages of scenarios to you about sword-and-shield vs. greatsword and what is better etc etc. I think someone mentioned HEMA earlier, too, and they'll know what I'm talking about in that regard. I will say that just 'off the cuff' in my opinion with two equally skilled and armored opponents you will likely see the person with the sword and shield overcoming the greatsword wielder more often just because that shield is a highly effective and adaptable tool while a greatsword only does one thing, maybe two if you count the occasional parry.
On a somewhat personal peeve I will say that I very often see this idea touted about with characters wielding this massive greatswords with relative ease and the thing is wide enough that they claim they just plant it in the ground and it can block arrows and even BULLETS. I will grant that this is Final Fantasy so ridiculous and fantastical things can and do happen like Cloud for example. HOWEVER since we have 'normal' looking swords with most of them being proportional as the majority I'm going to say that a cloud sword is just sort of ridiculous as a notion. Hell even I find Raubahn's swords to be too big and heavy to be using effectively with one in each hand. But regardless, using a sword as a shield just seems ridiculous even for FF. Plus it sounds like a good way to get your sword broken and/or shattered since it's not designed to take those kinds of impacts (small high velocity shots) on the flat. Not to mention that it's heavy and unwieldy! There's a video of a guy who made a replica of Cloud's Buster Sword and then had some body builder try to swing it around and he just couldn't do it, it weight like 50-60 pounds (a normal greatsword weighs probably 4-5). Finally, with such a large weapon your range of strikes is rather limited to downwards chops and horizontal cuts. You might get a thrust in but remember, it's not a spear. A one handed sword just has a lot more flexibility, range of motion, penetrating power if you half-sword especially, and would be faster. I know it's Final Fantasy but I just dislike the anime greatsword trope e.e
![[Image: yEROfKO.png]](http://i.imgur.com/yEROfKO.png)
![[Image: d_footer.png]](http://cuideag.com/ffxiv/resources/d_footer.png)
![[Image: FFXIV_Ravana.png]](http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20141025171718/finalfantasy/images/9/92/FFXIV_Ravana.png)
![[Image: 1qVSsTp.png]](http://i.imgur.com/1qVSsTp.png)
![[Image: 0uxkKgX.png]](http://i.imgur.com/0uxkKgX.png)
