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 6 months ago (1 children)

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 6 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Oh you so mighty and knowledgeable in the martial arts teach us your wisdom

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 1 points 6 months ago

Sure thing.

A good big man beats a good small man.

Two men beat one man.

You're welcome buddy.