I bet I could beat y'all with a Rilla doll, a bulbous Melonhead and bubblegum.

I bet I could beat y'all with a Rilla doll, a bulbous Melonhead and bubblegum.

I bet I could beat y'all with a Rilla doll, a bulbous Melonhead and bubblegum.

So on a serious note, any one up for a match? I want to test out a new character I have in the works.

<Snipped quote by GreivousKhan>

I'm definitely up for a match. I've got 4 characters posted right now. Always thinking of which one to add next.

@Fallenreaper Naw, Ruby's right around the same level as Iron, although she is significantly more... murder-ey.

@Fallenreaper I know the name of your mentor, Tearstone. I have either fought him or had discussions with him. Getting so old names are like fleeting memories. Anyway your character is a nice bit of realistic (for the most part). I don't think you'll have too hard a problem finding opponents as realistic is always a good bit of fun. It brings an edge to your writing if you can do realistic well.

**** Melon is correct (below) posting a general idea of strength and speed helps. Also bladed weapons up close and personal makes for very nasty, very fast fights. It doesn't take much to kill with a karambit, a quick step inside, a slash across the inside of the arm, up and across the throat from there. Followed by a heel trip and you are off. Nasty bit of deadly.

@Fallenreaper In regards to Iron it's not that big a deal but stating your character's physical characteristics are 'human' isn't very specific. It essentially means 'human average' which isn't very representative of an obviously physically fit human. There's also a pretty huge range of strengths and speeds that humans are capable of.

Plus in lower tier battles you tend to have a triangle of skill strength and speed, with one of the three being sacrificed for the others for balance reasons. Just because it's highly unlikely any two humans will match each other in strength and speed.

As your character is wiry they would probably favour speed a little over physical strength.

It's your character, so fair enough, from what I know of First Nation People's they tended to favour guerilla tactics where being physically robust in a pushing and shoving sort of way (which most medieval battles tended to come down to on the front line) was not a major concern, nor something they trained for.

<Snipped quote by MelonHead>

Common misconception.

If battle turned into shoving matches, the people in the first and second row would suffocate to death and cause all kinds of cohesive failure for the unit as a whole. Imagine 12 or more people pushing you from the back while being waged up against a dozen bodies in front of you. Total chaos.

Melees are actually something generals absolutely try to avoid. You'd have an insane amount of casualties and little tactical gain.

<Snipped quote by GreivousKhan>

Which is why medieval battles were incredibly rare and avoided at all costs, but they still happened.

<Snipped quote by GreivousKhan>

Which is why medieval battles were incredibly rare and avoided at all costs, but they still happened. Sucks to be the guy at the front I guess. Clifford Rogers believed a great deal of the French who died at Agincourt were actually pushed over by their own men and drowned in the mud, or even suffocated in their own armour (which is known to have happened in other battles, apparently.)

Poor French bastards.

I remember reading about a siege in the 100 years war that proves "civil war" is not an oxymoron. An English general was besieging a French castle. He managed to dig some kind of trench around the castle that was about to cause it to collapse or something, so rather than utterly crushing his enemies he properly warned the French general what he was doing. The French general didn't believe him, so the English bloke invited him outside to show him. The French dude was like, "Hmm... looks like you're right. OK, we surrender." Then the two armies had a pleasant banquet together.