259

submitted 5 months ago by ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

54 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] sushibowl@feddit.nl 17 points 5 months ago

That flail is certainly the worst of the lot. Terrible impractical weapon with scant evidence of it ever being used by anyone.

There's a two-handed version of the flail that is basically an agricultural threshing tool with spikes stuck into the head, which is much more plausible as a peasant's weapon (very similar development process as the nunchaku, also a highly overrated weapon). However most weapons that feature a flexible rope/chain part in their design all suffer from the same drawbacks: difficult to control, and limited striking power.

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 8 points 5 months ago

The two-handed version of the flail is definitely real and a reasonably formidable weapon. I study at a Spanish HEMA school and we have one source—Mendoza—which basically says it should be used in the same way as the montante (the Spanish greatsword), except without thrusts. Like the montante, its best value is when against multiple opponents, such as doing crowd control or escorting someone. Mendoza also describes his flail as being made of three separate chains with individual weights on them, rather than one large thrasher-like tool as shown in the headline artwork on the Wikipedia page.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 3 points 5 months ago

Good for multiple opponents sure sounds like you actually mean "good for putting down peasant revolts where they're both underarmed and unarmored"

[-] Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone 3 points 5 months ago

More so for defending yourself against multiple people or holding a bridge head

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 1 points 5 months ago

The only time a fighter can be assumed to win with even 2 to 1 odds is with a significant material and training advantage. And they'd still be better off with a weapon that isn't a gimmick.