Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
interpretations that which one was taking part would make all the
difference between close fought battle and Link being curbstomped.
>.>
Woo, I'm late. Anyway.
Let's assume the late Middle Ages version of the tale. This is the one from the era of chivalry and plate armour that everyone thinks of when they're not referencing Monty Python. First, let's compare the swords.
Excalibur is a pipeline to God that only follows Arthur's commands while he remains virtuous. It delivers unto him the skill to overcome any adversary, and will never break or tarnish. This sword is a longsword, which is a late medieval, light, two-handed sword.
The Master Sword is the sword of evil's bane. Like Excalibur, it's immune to damage, but is essentially a mundane sword against non-evil entities. This weapon has gone through various interpretations. For instance, Skyward Sword footage makes it clear that it's a longsword, with enough hilt length for easy use in two hands while still being light enough for one. During Ocarina, though, it's quite obviously a one-hander.
Arthur has the better weapon, by virtue of its more advanced technical design and its most holistic application. Link's Master Sword is shorter, more difficult to control and delivers slower, less powerful blows. In addition, its power against evil is pointless against Arthur.
In fact, Arthur probably wins this one outright. Typically, Link is a country commoner type that gets chosen for his courage. That's all well and good, but he has a very specific role; to defeat the bad guy with the Master Sword. So the setting and legend provides this very specific person with very specific qualities a very specific counter to a very specific villain. Arthur, on the other hand, can be trusted to know what he's doing against a wide variety of adversaries. In the legends, he's also very skilled with dagger and spear, meaning that his combat skills have some diversity to them.
Link may be an iconic hero to us, but the fact of the matter is that he's a modern hero with modern perspectives on combat applied to him. Arthur's legend was a product of the Migration Period all the way through to the late Middle Ages, where his combat skills needed no explanation most people had a bit of an idea how this kind of thing really went. By the time we reach the late Middle Ages interpretation, the assumption is that the standard knightly martial arts, at the very least, have been applied to Arthur. This makes him far deadlier than Link, especially in single combat.
Arthur wins this one by a hefty margin, but they'd probably actually team up to kick momentous amounts of ass.
Edit@INUH: Shepard also has superpowers, if you pick a biotic class.
paralyze King Arthur from a distance or set him on fire from a distance?
The initial conditions stated that each combatant only has their signature sword.