He has no shield. Instead, the shield has been substituted by an armoured arm. I don't know how this is realistic, but it is standard in medieval fantasy scenarios. And it makes sense: if the arm armour is strong enough, you can use it to deflect enemy blows like you would use your shield, or your arm to deflect punches, while charging with that side. Then the Dart's slash would come with the other hand, while the enemy is trying to ready himself to another blow.
No, not really. Had it been useful, it would have been implemeneted. The problem is, you cannot drop it. A shield is extremely heavy, and those retreating, or at least in phalanx warfare, would drop them in their escape. Or, in the Iliad, could sling them over their shoulders to protect their back. Then there are other shield tactics, such as shield-walls and phalanxes, none of which could be implemented with armour such as that. Personally, there is little in the way of fantasy armour and weaponry that I like or, rather, I dislike anything that isn't actually functional. But as I said, if you want that sort of armour, Galvorn beats all... and no one knows about it! ... It's from Tolkien, in case you haven't guessed. Jet black, so hard arrows cannot pierce it yet bendable - forged from meteoric iron.
Furthermore, I forget who mentioned this, but there was mention of speaking of battle in a very small scale rather than on the field which I was speaking of. Well, the four on four RPG type battles would be extremely rare in real life, I think. Most great engagements make use of thousands of soldiers, sometimes a hundred thousand.
But anyway, I'll concede your point for the most part, one these grounds. If a woman tried, she could train to be stronger, tougher, and even mentally hardier than men. This, however, is assuming that the men do not do the same regiment. On an even ground of training, men by physical make-up have a stronger build... mostly. I'm extremely light and scrawny, but that is only because I don't excercise at all. As far as battle-heroes go, if one were to take the greatest of the men, and the greatest of the women, the man would win, it is just the way of things.
Actually, to be honest, I just find it a horrible cliche in games to have these 'expert' women fighters when, although they do exist, it is an anomaly, and should not be so prevalent. I was doing the very same thing for the female character in my story, ie. making her a good fighter, when it dawned on me: not only am I betraying the old literary traditions, I'm also not making any sense in doing this. And so for a very long time, though she carries a sword, she really has no chance, especially when she comes up against a soldier or someone that has greater strength. I'm just looking at things realistically. Like I said, I know that some women fight better: I'd wager there are lots of girls that are stronger than me at the moment - but I'm a writer and engineer right now, and have little need for strength - but that doesn't change the overall.
But truly, what does it matter? Women were not made for war-matters. Let women be women and men be men. Things are so much more beautiful when the distinctions and lines are not blurred.
