heroes

[Ink]

Two-hands on a weapon is beneficial due to the increased control surface and distance between the control points (the arms); much like it is harder to do a push-up with one arm than with two (even if, suppose, the single arm were made to be as strong as two).

Given this, a four-armed being couldn't really wield a two-handed weapon with two arms from the same side of its body and receive any benefit. Similarly, a 'four-handed' weapon wouldn't really be feasible, or much use, unless the being had such a shape that the four arms were set upon its body in such a way that each provided a significantly different angle from the other arms.

A humanoid would probably never achieve the necessary body shape. An insectoid might because an exoskeleton provides the sorts of hardpoints necessary to place appendages along the body were having many of them provides an actual benefit. However, an exoskeleton on a thing larger than an insect is itself a problem.

Despite what your suitors may have told you, size does matter.

[chrispedersen]

Originally Posted by Ink

Two-hands on a weapon is beneficial due to the increased control surface and distance between the control points (the arms); much like it is harder to do a push-up with one arm than with two (even if, suppose, the single arm were made to be as strong as two).

Given this, a four-armed being couldn't really wield a two-handed weapon with two arms from the same side of its body and receive any benefit. Similarly, a 'four-handed' weapon wouldn't really be feasible, or much use, unless the being had such a shape that the four arms were set upon its body in such a way that each provided a significantly different angle from the other arms.

A humanoid would probably never achieve the necessary body shape. An insectoid might because an exoskeleton provides the sorts of hardpoints necessary to place appendages along the body were having many of them provides an actual benefit. However, an exoskeleton on a thing larger than an insect is itself a problem.

Despite what your suitors may have told you, size does matter.

Being able to fire two crossbows would be of significant advantage. Or four.

I also don't agree with the rest of the analysis. Arms evolved to be useful - the same would likely be true for two armed creatures as much as 4.

As someone that once upon a time could do 300 one armed pushups -it wasn't significantly 'harder' than doing two handed pushups. Once you can do that many it is casual effort to do them either one handed or two.

[theenemy]

Originally Posted by Ink

Two-hands on a weapon is beneficial due to the increased control surface and distance between the control points (the arms); much like it is harder to do a push-up with one arm than with two (even if, suppose, the single arm were made to be as strong as two).

Given this, a four-armed being couldn't really wield a two-handed weapon with two arms from the same side of its body and receive any benefit. Similarly, a 'four-handed' weapon wouldn't really be feasible, or much use, unless the being had such a shape that the four arms were set upon its body in such a way that each provided a significantly different angle from the other arms.

A humanoid would probably never achieve the necessary body shape. An insectoid might because an exoskeleton provides the sorts of hardpoints necessary to place appendages along the body were having many of them provides an actual benefit. However, an exoskeleton on a thing larger than an insect is itself a problem.

Despite what your suitors may have told you, size does matter.

why are you over-analyzing a game? it's a fantasy world, anything is possible

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally Posted by theenemy

why are you over-analyzing a game? it's a fantasy world, anything is possible

Probably because trying to understand how something can conceivably work, or not as the case might be, is as interesting and fun to some people as inventing something our of whole cloth without considering its practical implications is to other people?

Some people when confronted with the idea of a millipede with shoes think it is the best thing since sliced soup and dualwielding shotgun sized gunblades, other people consider the need for a shoemaker, possibly specialized shoe shops with extra patient personnel, and confront the issue of the socio-economic impact on shoeshiners. Wouldn't the world be boring if we all just waved away all critical thinking with the "a wizard did it!" rationale?