IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Spurs, not the basketball team, the weapon
JTNLANGE
post Jun 22 2006, 01:20 PM
Post #1


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 96
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Caledonia,WI,UCAS
Member No.: 885



Does anyone know if the damage code for spurs is per hand or for both of them. I seem to remember in SR3 that if you had a spur on each hand you add half damage to your attack for using 2 spurs. I don't see that anywhere in SR4. So would a damage attack be just the damage code or damage code plus half.


Trevor
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eryk the Red
post Jun 22 2006, 01:28 PM
Post #2


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 633
Joined: 23-February 06
Member No.: 8,301



The difference is moot under these rules. Whether you have spurs on one hand or both, it is assumed that when you attack with them, you are attacking primarily with the spurs you have, so you use the damage listed for the spurs regardless.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TBRMInsanity
post Jun 22 2006, 01:37 PM
Post #3


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,002
Joined: 22-April 06
From: Canada
Member No.: 8,494



(Str/2 + 3)P pg 337
When using two weapons:
pg 140
Use of a second set of spurs splits your combat dice between each spur but you do damage for each spur. So possible:
(Str+6)P damage on one turn.

Remember though you get -2dice for using a weapon in your off hand unless you are Ambedextirous.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Squinky
post Jun 22 2006, 02:47 PM
Post #4


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,479
Joined: 6-May 05
From: Idaho
Member No.: 7,377



QUOTE (TBRMInsanity)
(Str/2 + 3)P pg 337
When using two weapons:
pg 140
Use of a second set of spurs splits your combat dice between each spur but you do damage for each spur. So possible:
(Str+6)P damage on one turn.

Remember though you get -2dice for using a weapon in your off hand unless you are Ambedextirous.

My understanding is he wouldn't do Str+6 damage, he would do Str/2+3 damage twice. Little difference there, as having two spurs should let you penetrate armor more than one. It gives a second attack that must be rolled on and all that separately.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hobgoblin
post Jun 22 2006, 05:41 PM
Post #5


panda!
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,331
Joined: 8-March 02
From: north of central europe
Member No.: 2,242



thing is that the two weapon combat rules are only for ranged combat.

and in a way that makes sense, as close combat isnt a single swing or blow, its a series of moves and countermoves...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shrike30
post Jun 22 2006, 05:59 PM
Post #6


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,556
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Seattle
Member No.: 98



You could always give a two-spur sammie the +1 teamwork bonus :P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James McMurray
post Jun 22 2006, 06:05 PM
Post #7


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,430
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Member No.: 6,957



QUOTE (Shrike30)
You could always give a two-spur sammie the +1 teamwork bonus :P

That's actually not a bad idea. It grants a bonus but isn't incredibly powerful like some other systems. +2 might be better, it would bring it in line with the most common ranged weapon enhancer (the smartgun). I'd definitely require some sort of edge or skill (perhaps a specialization) so as to avoid giving free dice to anyone that can buy a knife for their offhand.

Averaging the damage values would also be something to consider, for when someone wants to use a katana and wakizashi combo.

IIRC SR3's dual-weapon in melee rules were horrendous.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Squinky
post Jun 22 2006, 06:16 PM
Post #8


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,479
Joined: 6-May 05
From: Idaho
Member No.: 7,377



QUOTE (hobgoblin)
thing is that the two weapon combat rules are only for ranged combat.

and in a way that makes sense, as close combat isnt a single swing or blow, its a series of moves and countermoves...

Agreed. But there are rules for splitting your melee attack between multiple foes, so it's pretty close. Although I do think that is intended for multiple opponents, I don't see why it couldn't apply to one.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ronin3338
post Jun 22 2006, 09:49 PM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 314
Joined: 25-February 06
Member No.: 8,307



Off the top of my head:
How about, for an off hand weapon, you have to have an off hand weapon skill. If using both weapons, you can only use as many dice as you have in the off hand weapon, but if you hit you can boost the main weapon by 1/2 the damage of the off weapon. There should probably be some limits, like the off hand can't be larger than the main, but GM's can rule on that.

That way, to be fully capable, your skill in the off hand weapon needs to match your main weapon. Honestly, I think that without skill, having a weapon in your off hand is mroe of a distraction, which is why I'm considering this route.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Toptomcat
post Jun 22 2006, 10:07 PM
Post #10


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 626
Joined: 1-March 04
Member No.: 6,112



Sounds a bit too much like the old, bad rules.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James McMurray
post Jun 23 2006, 12:39 AM
Post #11


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,430
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Member No.: 6,957



The old bad rules let you combine the dice though, rather than limiting the dice. I don't know if that's the best possible option, but it's better than a return to SR3's version IMO.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Geekkake
post Jun 23 2006, 01:02 AM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 475
Joined: 13-March 06
From: dusty Mexican borderlands
Member No.: 8,372



QUOTE (James McMurray)
The old bad rules let you combine the dice though, rather than limiting the dice. I don't know if that's the best possible option, but it's better than a return to SR3's version IMO.

I, personally, am down for limiting dice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Toptomcat
post Jun 23 2006, 02:09 AM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 626
Joined: 1-March 04
Member No.: 6,112



I still don't know. Melee damage is a much more precious commodity in this edition than it was in previous ones.
Besides, the real benefit to using two weapons at once generally isn't that you can inflict more damage (attack with both,) it's that you can parry with one and simultaneously attack with the other.
(Combat Sense-like benifit?)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James McMurray
post Jun 23 2006, 02:59 AM
Post #14


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,430
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Member No.: 6,957



That really depends on the situation. If your opponent doesn't know what he's doing, or does but isn't near your skill level, parrying is less important. If you're armed with two swords and your opponent has bare knuckles, parrying is less important.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Xenith
post Jun 23 2006, 06:48 AM
Post #15


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 399
Joined: 27-May 04
Member No.: 6,361



Alright, thing for two weapons in melee combat is.. with the correct training and combination of weapons... they own most people. I know, since I've fought with them, albeit with SCA rattan.

Close behind is the shield... but wrap around shots take care of that quickly if they try to keep their shield on you.

But anyway, most of the time offhand weapons are used to defend and block while your main weapon gets them when their attacks blocked by your offhand leave them open. Or the other way around.

For example; our trainer loves to use a saber in his main hand and a long handled axe (with alternative piercing end on the bottom, like the SR4 axe). The axe he uses to block, but also to thrust with the piercing end to keep opponets at a distance (and maybe impale them if they're sloppy) or hack them in the face or chest with the axehead if they get real close. And the main handweapon plays a rather standard role of wacking those open spots, wrap around shots, and general mayhem. It gets rather scary.

I, on the other hand, use a dual saber method, with my offhand weilding the saber reversed. The offhand uses pretty much the same method as the axe without the axe head, but with a very quick underhanded slash(nice for gutting or hamstringing them). And the main hand plays the same role as the trainers main hand.

Rarely are both weapons used for an all out offensive, but instead is useful for defend and counter tactics. On the other hand, it allows you to take advantage of more openings as well.

I'm not entirely sure how this could apply to the rules.... perhaps give the option of either an extra attack or a bonus to defense of some kind...or even the option of counterattacks...

Not sure, what say you?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bryce963
post Jun 24 2006, 02:54 PM
Post #16


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 31
Joined: 26-April 06
From: DFW, "the capital of Texas", CAS
Member No.: 8,504



You could just increase the reach by 1 for having an off hand weapon, simple yet effective. That raises the chace for you to beat the reach of your opponent and get the benefits there of, and requires no extra skills or rolling. But it would have to be limted by logic, as in not with a monowhip or a two handed weapon etc. I think I might do this, the only time it would really be effective would be for someone tooled up for close combat with ambidexterity, that seems like enough limit to me, your adept and sam would be doing this mabye, but the rest wouldnt bother, so it wont be like D&D where there its hard to reason that every tom dick and barthog doenst have a knife in thier off hand. If you wanted to attack with both, then split your pool, but this lets you get a small edge being more defensive, or pressing the attack more.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Xenith
post Jun 24 2006, 07:14 PM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 399
Joined: 27-May 04
Member No.: 6,361



That sounds reasonable actually. Not going to give an uber bonus, but still gives you a tiny edge over the single weapons. Perhaps a certain level of training might be required, nothing over the top, just some training in it during downtime and maybe even a little Karma. Much like a manuever ala Martial Arts styles... but with a bit less uberness...

And I'd say it gives +1 reach, no matter the size of the weapon.

Nice idea Bryce. XD
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shrike30
post Jun 26 2006, 05:49 PM
Post #18


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,556
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Seattle
Member No.: 98



That's a simple, easy way of doing it. I like it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post Jun 26 2006, 06:17 PM
Post #19


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



You don't need to add an artificial reach die for having a second weapon. You just have to remember to apply the -1 die to the target's defense for defending against additional attacks since his last action. It's already in the rules.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Xenith
post Jun 26 2006, 07:37 PM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 399
Joined: 27-May 04
Member No.: 6,361



In Dual wielding, the off hand is often used more often in a defensive manner than offensive for those that know what they are doing. Rarely do you do the whole two weapon flurry common to movies and/or DnD. In essence, the offhand weapon is more like a shield, and just as useful (shields are great for pinning down peoples weapons and whapping them upside the head with a good wrap around shot...XD), as it tends to keep others at a distance with the threat of the offhand weapon rather than the use. It also gives you more options for counter attacks and just plain more dexterity than a normal shield would (not to mention lighter...).

Get too crazy with the whole dual weapon attacks and you die because you left yourself open, plain and simple. Dual weapons are useful to deflect, control, and trap a spear, thus eleminating the entire threat of a spear... unless they decide to trip you with the shaft... that sucks. You can do things with dual weapons that you can't with one weapon near as well... like deflecting heavier weapons (never parry a glaive or a great sword, deflect it if possible.)

Saying, "it doesn't need it" is your opinion. But I don't share it as I have seen and used weapons in a such a manner.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post Jun 26 2006, 08:30 PM
Post #21


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (Xenith)
In Dual wielding, the off hand is often used more often in a defensive manner than offensive for those that know what they are doing.

I fight with two weapons for fun, against other people who have done this sort of thing for decades. I'm still relatively new at it, but the biggest critique that the experts have of my style is that I'm using my off-hand weapon more often in a defensive manner than offensive. This is from folks who know what they're doing.

When using two melee weapons, one is supposed to be fluid, using both weapons equally for attack and defense. Try telling a boxer that his or her off-hand should be used primarily for defense.

>>>EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it, my mentor mostly says I am supposed to use my feet for defense (moving, not kicking), but in practical terms, I still need to use both swords for both attacking and defending.

QUOTE
Rarely do you do the whole two weapon flurry common to movies and/or DnD.

This, at least, is true. Usually your opponent gets taken out by the second or third hit in your combo.

QUOTE
In essence, the offhand weapon is more like a shield, and just as useful (shields are great for pinning down peoples weapons and whapping them upside the head with a good wrap around shot...XD), as it tends to keep others at a distance with the threat of the offhand weapon rather than the use. It also gives you more options for counter attacks and just plain more dexterity than a normal shield would (not to mention lighter...).

You seem to either be speaking from experience or trying convey that appearance. Where are you coming from with this?

QUOTE
Dual weapons are useful to deflect, control, and trap a spear, thus eleminating the entire threat of a spear... unless they decide to trip you with the shaft... that sucks.

In practice, the spear has a very nice advantage over two weapons. If you can deflect the spear and keep it controlled long enough for you to get close enough to your target to hit him, then great. But usually that target is backing up, disengaging, and choking up to impale you on the tip as you run forward. I'd rather have the shield against the spear, or even a long stick, really.

QUOTE
You can do things with dual weapons that you can't with one weapon near as well... like deflecting heavier weapons (never parry a glaive or a great sword, deflect it if possible.)

Actually, I've parried a glaive with a rapier. The trick is to catch their foible (the end part of their weapon) on your forte (the part closest to your hand).

QUOTE
But I don't share it as I have seen and used weapons in a such a manner.

Please, share. What have you used, and under what circumstances? I think a comparison of our experiences would add to the discussion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nim
post Jun 26 2006, 10:57 PM
Post #22


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 244
Joined: 8-June 06
Member No.: 8,681



QUOTE (Aaron @ Jun 26 2006, 03:30 PM)

QUOTE
Rarely do you do the whole two weapon flurry common to movies and/or DnD.

This, at least, is true. Usually your opponent gets taken out by the second or third hit in your combo.

I'd make an exception there for knives, at least. There are some two-knife styles that emphasize large numbers of rapid (perhaps minor) cuts, rather than going for the throat. With weapons any longer than that, perhaps not so much.

In what knife training I've had, I've had teachers of both opinions - some were of the 'cut every open target and degrade the opponent's ability' mindset, while others (including the master) were more inclined to strike only at hands (as a distraction) and kill-points.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shrike30
post Jun 26 2006, 11:08 PM
Post #23


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,556
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Seattle
Member No.: 98



Watch someone trained in Escrima sometime when he's using a pair of weapons. They're being used quite interchangeably on attack and defense.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lagomorph
post Jun 27 2006, 12:47 AM
Post #24


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 834
Joined: 30-June 03
Member No.: 4,832



I think +1 reach is an awesome compromize for using two weapons. It adds to attack or defense depending on how it's used.

As for real life, I have no experience in two weapons fighting, I saw some one with a dagger and rapier though it was scary.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ankle Biter
post Jun 27 2006, 01:49 AM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 671
Joined: 9-March 06
Member No.: 8,353



QUOTE (Shrike30)
Watch someone trained in Escrima sometime when he's using a pair of weapons. They're being used quite interchangeably on attack and defense.

Gaaah, Escrima is scary. From what I have seen of it, the attacker basically first carves up an opponent's arms so they can't hold a weapon, then flows up the arms for some head and chest shot finishing moves.

Not that it makes much difference but in LARP (foam sword) fighting, in very general terms on even skill levels

2 weapons vs polearm, if the polearm guy has room to back up, he wins, if not he gets one hit in, then is pated.

2 weapons vs 1 weapon. 2 weapons wins by using one weapon to lock down the opponent, then attacking when the opportunity arises with the other.

2 Weapons vs weapon and shield, The shield if used carefully it can keep both weapons at bay long enough for long enough for the shield fighter to get some good attacks in.

Genrally speaking most LARPers will, at low power, use 2 weapons as parry sticks to keep big scary monsters at bay, and, at high power, use 2 weapons to deal as much damage as possible while ignoring blows to the self.

2 Daggers is a different matter, though, as short weapons they are almost exclusively used for shiving people in the back, and diving face first into a fight hoping to smoosh a vital location while trading off hits to the limbs.

SCA fighting is more realistic, though. Do you do the "light" "hit" "heavy" (can't remember the exact phrases) method, Xenith? If so the low and high power comparisons are essentially the same as fighting in normal SCA class armor, vs fighitng in true Full Plate mail, fitted to you, and made of tungsten titanium alloy. (Naah, didn't feel that at all, sorry mate, light :D). Not that SCA types would actually do that, but if for some insane reason a fight got serious your tactics do change if you know the other guy can't hurt you...

To be honest, using a second weapon for extra reach is a good idea, it is a mechanic in place already, and reflects the simultaneously offensive/defensive nature of the second weapon. Boy I took a long time to say just that. :)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 10th July 2020 - 11:19 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.