Expanded weapons charts.

[Woodclaw]

It's still an abomination used by players who usually don't understand the use of medieval weaponry to justify extra damage in RPGs. Sword and shield where the shield is used to bash is not the sort of dual-wielding that most players understand as dual-wielding. That is "big sword in one hand and sword or axe in the other and I do twice as much damage" rather than "I use my off-hand weapon as a parrying device in place of a shield and can sometimes with a bit of luck stab him somewhere useful".

Having written material for Chivalry and Sorcery and played that and RQ for years as well as studying medieval warfare I've seen all manner of justifications for a player wanting to use two weapons to make an uber-warrior that have virtually no basis in fact beyond they saw it done in a film or on tv.

You can flavour your One Ring off-hand parrying device as an axe if you want but it still mechanically counts as a shield.

I agree that 99% of the RPGs out there got dual wielding very wrong. As I said a couple of times before, I think that the right way to handle it is not to provide extra attacks (which are one the greatest gamebreakers ever), but rather to provide a somewhat flexible attack/defense bonus. This sowewhat balance the combat scale having one highly defensive style (weapon and shield), one highly damaging (two handed) and one that boost the attack (dual wielding). It might not be a perfect historical model, but I think that should balance out nicely in game terms.
As for the rest, shield bashing is another black beast of mine. My players usually split on it, some didn't even consider it a viable combat option (even from the descriptive standpoint, which sadden me a lot), the others make a fuss when the combat system don't include it (alongside reach and a few other things that are hard to properly model without going into minutiae).

[Glorelendil]

If by "sacred texts" you mean the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings, actually there's one example at least -- born more out of desperation than choice, I admit: when Sam faces Shelob to save Frodo, the description says that he rush her with his own Numenorean blade in the right and picks up Sting with the left (I can't find the exact quote but I belive it was the opening of "The Choices of Master Samwise" -- Two Towers, Book IV, Chapter 10)

Good catch. But, of course, he came to his senses when it mattered:

“For Sam still stood upon his feet, and dropping his own sword, with both hands he held the elven-blade point upwards, fending off that ghastly roof”

[Woodclaw]

If by "sacred texts" you mean the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings, actually there's one example at least -- born more out of desperation than choice, I admit: when Sam faces Shelob to save Frodo, the description says that he rush her with his own Numenorean blade in the right and picks up Sting with the left (I can't find the exact quote but I belive it was the opening of "The Choices of Master Samwise" -- Two Towers, Book IV, Chapter 10)

Good catch. But, of course, he came to his senses when it mattered:

“For Sam still stood upon his feet, and dropping his own sword, with both hands he held the elven-blade point upwards, fending off that ghastly roof”

As I said it was more of of desperation than choice -- more or less like Thorin at the battle of Moria.

[Glorelendil]

As I think you're agreeing, there's a difference between characters occasionally holding two weapon-like objects... Aragorn with two torches, Sam with two short swords, Butterbur with two mugs of ale...and evidence for a 'two-weapon fighting style'.

Conflating the two would be a fairly desperate attempt to rationalize the latter.

[aramis]

Just want to point out that...no offense to Icelanders...the Icelandic Sagas are wonderful stories but hardly "historical record."

They do indicate what 10th to 12th century Icelanders felt was believable, and they had no issue believing a man could wield two weapon for better effect than one.

They thought of them as histories, and we're discovering that oral histories are FAR less mutable than the historians of the 1950's and 1960's claimed.

[Glorelendil]

Just want to point out that...no offense to Icelanders...the Icelandic Sagas are wonderful stories but hardly "historical record."

They do indicate what 10th to 12th century Icelanders felt was believable, and they had no issue believing a man could wield two weapon for better effect than one.

An equally valid (meaning equally nondisprovable) theory is that they gave these heroes two weapons precisely because they thought of it as something beyond the ability of normal men.

Certainly oral histories can be surprisingly accurate; there have been some interesting modern-day confirmations of stories that were handed down by generations of American slaves, for example.

But we also know that many traditional "histories" are full of stories of witches and dragons and superhuman feats.

[Glorelendil]

I'm imagining an argument on some RPG forums of the 28th century about dual wielding 20th century firearms. Somebody will cite historical evidence, in the form of preserved Blu Ray archives, of our heroes shooting two weapons at once, held sideways, while diving through windows.

Somebody will respond, "Actually, there are many surprisingly accurate historical details in that record."

[Arthadan]

There are plenty of evidence of dual-wielding fighting styles specially in Asia, so it's not impossible or far-fetched (from Wikipedia):

The use of weapon combinations in each hand has been mentioned for close combat in western Europe during the Byzantine,[2] Medieval, and Renaissance era.[3] The use of a parrying dagger such as a main gauche along with a rapier is common in historical European martial arts.[4] Traditional schools of Japanese martial arts include dual wield techniques, particularly a style of classical Japanese swordsmanship conceived by the Miyamoto Musashi involving the katana and wakizashi, two-sword kenjutsu techniques he called Niten Ichi-ryū. Eskrima, the traditional martial arts of the Philippines teaches Doble Baston techniques involving the basic use of a pair of rattan sticks and also Espada y daga or Sword/Stick and Dagger. Okinawan martial arts have a method that uses a pair of sai. Haidong Gumdo, which is a form of Korean martial arts, mentions the use of two weapons simultaneously. Chinese martial arts involve the use of a pair of Butterfly swords and Hook swords. Gatka, a weapon-based martial art from the Punjab region, is known to use two sticks at a time. The Thailand weapon-based martial art Krabi Krabong involves the use of a separate Krabi in each hand.

However, does it fit in the setting?

I would make it exceptional yet possible. In Dark Ages Europe looks like it was all about the shieldwall and certainly a two weapons fighting style would be out of place. But we are speaking about adventurers who do not fight in close formation and learn to fight mostly on their own (if they survive long enough, that's it).

I haven't played much because I can't find a group of players, so I can't say much in that respect. But I would make it:
- Hard to get (you need to get some other skills in order to get this one and maybe minimum Attributes score).
- Better chances to hit but no more damage than usual, so only really strong guys would go for it.

[Beran]

Has this subject really come up this much in games? In my limited experience with TOR not one of my players or those I have played with ever asked if they could use two weapons. I haven't even heard anyone asking about using a shield bash.

[Valarian]

In individual combat, having two axes can be more advantageous than a small shield. Basically, one weapon is used to parry and defend. Either by taking the opponent's weapon out of line, or to hook the opponent by the arm, shoulder, side and move them so that the second weapon can get a better hit. Usually, the off-hand weaoon is the one used to defend. It's in the front of the body and closest to the opponent. However, a feint can mean that the main hand is used to hook and lead the opponent, giving the off hand weapon a clear strike at the exposed shoulder or back. Two weapon figyting styles do exist. They may not have been normal practice, especially in the line of battle, but they were used. As the typical adventuring company of characters is a group of individuals, I dont have a problem allowing a player to use two weapon styles when running a game. I do have s problem with the style giving a player an extra attack.