Two weapon fighting confusion, Why would you bother? Options

[Nerdynick]

Something my friends and I have been puzzled about for a while is why would someone bother using two weapons? From my interpretation of the rules (which may not be entirely accurate), two pistols requires you to split your dicepool in half and removes any bonus you get from laser sights/smartlinks. So you're pumping out double the shots at less than half the accuracy?

For melee weapons, your target has a slight dice pool penalty and you gain a slight bonus to melee defense (unless you have the two weapon fighting maneuver, in which case it becomes a rather substantial bonus to melee defense).

And on top of those, you get an off hand penalty unless you're ambidextrous.

Both of these seem fairly underwhelming to me, so what is the real bonus to fighting with two weapons, aside from style?

[Critias]

If you've got a monstrously huge die pool (like a gunslinger Adept might, let's say), and you're shooting at baddies without monstrously huge dodge pools, it can be worth it to go the two-pistol route. Remember that every dodge attempt lowers dodge/reaction pools by one, and you can eventually overwhelm an attacker by pouring multiple shots at them...*shrugs*

Is it awesome? Nope. But, then, it shouldn't be, or every cop would have two guns on his belt.

[Raiki]

Well, you don't actually have to split your dice pool in half. You can split it however you want, so long as each pool has at least 1 die. And that's not always so bad. If your average runner is fighting a professional level 1 ganger, even rolling the 5 or 6 dice that splitting your pool would give is going to be enough. You may not get many net hits, but then again the ganger's soak pool isn't going to be all that fantastic either.

It's a mixed bag really, though dual-weilding versus high defense targets seems like a bad idea.



Just my 2 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) .



Edit: Damn! Ninja everywhere! I'm surrounded! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ninja.gif)

~R~

[Ramorta]

Also to point out, things like specalizations get added AFTER you split the dice pool. So someone with 3 pistols (+2 semi-automatics) and 3 agility. With a dicepool of 6 (+2 specalization) before the split. Designate 3 dice to each hand, +2 for your specalization is 5 dice. I'd call that a decent tradeoff. (Taking into account having ambidexterity)

Another reason would be increased ammo capacity. Having a spair clip already loaded into your gun never hurt anybody.

[Medicineman]

Also to point out, things like specalizations get added AFTER you split the dice pool.
Right, but the Yin to this Yang is that every negative Mod is also added After splitting the Pool (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
Akimbo Shooting is a mixed blessing ,I like it,some of my Chars have it(the Real Fun comes with 4 Guns (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) ) and its OK for them, but its not for every Char and certainly not for every situation,but you'r more flexible .....and it's better to have and need not than need and have not

With a YinYang Dance
Medicineman

[Glyph]

When you have a high dice pool and don't need all of it, then splitting it in order to take out more enemies is a valid tactical decision. Wielding two weapons also lets you switch between different types of ammo or damage easily, or, if you have a ranged weapon in one hand and a melee weapon in the other hand, switch between close combat and ranged combat.

I don't really mind it being an occasionally useful niche tactic, because otherwise everyone would use it, all of the time. I remember AD&D, when the rules for two-weapon styles came out, and it seemed like every single fighter was a dual-wielder.

[Mayhem_2006]

Another oft overlooked reason for using 2 weapons ambidextrously is that you can fire a short burst from one using a simple action and then a short burst from the other using the other simple action you get in the same turn, with lower recoil penalties than you would get for firing 2 short bursts from 1 weapon.

Doing it that way, you get your full dice pool and keep your smartlink bonuses.

And effectively double your ammo, of course.

[Mäx]

Also if you have guns with lots of RC you can use wide burst to give the opponent(s) a nice negative to their dodge pool, giving you a better chance to score some nethits even with your split pool.
Or you can just use 2 guns with less RC and just shoot them one after the other, essentially doubling your ammo capacity and RC compared to just using one gun.

[Shinobi Killfist]

When you have a high dice pool and don't need all of it, then splitting it in order to take out more enemies is a valid tactical decision. Wielding two weapons also lets you switch between different types of ammo or damage easily, or, if you have a ranged weapon in one hand and a melee weapon in the other hand, switch between close combat and ranged combat.

I don't really mind it being an occasionally useful niche tactic, because otherwise everyone would use it, all of the time. I remember AD&D, when the rules for two-weapon styles came out, and it seemed like every single fighter was a dual-wielder.

I like it to be a valid choice, which is almost is now.

Oh in AD&D two weapon fighting was cool if you had a high dex. It was -4 to your attacks but you reaction bonus canceled it, so a 18 dex put you at an extra attack and no penalty. Or just be a drow and they got no penalty no matter what their dex was. I think 2e had the same rules but no perk for being a drow.

[Udoshi]

The main benefit to fighting two-weapon style is fighting pirate style: Sword+Gun, with two-weapon defense and a melee hardened pistol.
Its also worth noting that melee weapons can just flat out multihit melee targets by splitting the dice pool without resorting to double wielding.

Since penalties and bonuses come after the split, it can be good thing or a bad thing. If you plan on akimbo fighting, then you just need to stack your bonuses and eliminate penalties as usual. All it does is get rid of laser sight/smartlink bonuses - all other bonuses stay intact. Tacnets, for example, or tracer rounds(if you have decent compensation) while using an Improved Rangefinder(or the hawkeye quality, or both) saves you a dice at medium range. I don't care what the FAQ says, about pool splitting and specializations, its wrong, and contradicts the anniversary edition, so there's that too.
Don't forget that subsequent defenses carry a -1 per defense penalty, and a two-gun user can put out 4 shots per pass. If they all hit, the last shot has a pretty hefty defense penalty, and short wide bursting just makes it worse.

Like anything in shadowrun, two gunning is good if you specialize/focus on it. For two-gunning, you have to do it slightly differently: Focus on getting rid of or reducing the penalties, because there's not a lot of bonuses to be had.

That being said, gunslinger adepts are pretty awesome, and the classic gunslinger spam-arai are pretty good(two cyberarms, gyromounts, high velocity smgs with gasvents, tracer rounds, and long bursts everywhere).
If you really want, you can make a double Shiva Arms Troll(okay, it would probably be a fomori) using the arsenal advanced combat options for wielding big weapons, using 6 shotguns on wide burst wide choke to just obliterate any defenders dice pool at close range.
You're welcome for that mental image.

[Neurosis]

It is not ineffective enough to outweigh how cool it is.

[Yerameyahu]

Or how wannabe it looks. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Freaking John Woo…

[Makki]

like a gunslinger Adept might

Adepts can also negate negativ modifiers with Adept Centering. Dual wielding makes this metamagic practically double effective.

[IKerensky]

Only benefit I see is to have different munition/weapon setting on each gun and in fact using only one at a time while having both draw.

If you really want to shoot and use both your hands there is plenty of better option than using dual guns (assault rifle by example).

[IKerensky]

Another oft overlooked reason for using 2 weapons ambidextrously is that you can fire a short burst from one using a simple action and then a short burst from the other using the other simple action you get in the same turn, with lower recoil penalties than you would get for firing 2 short bursts from 1 weapon.

Doing it that way, you get your full dice pool and keep your smartlink bonuses.

And effectively double your ammo, of course.

Overlooked because not in my rulebook or RAI, a character wont get any benefit from using 2 weapons to shoot his short burst rather than twice 1 weapon.

As far as I recall the rules, it say the penalty is by bullet shot after the first in the round, I dont recall it specificating with the same gun.

[Wulffyre]

Overlooked because not in my rulebook or RAI, a character wont get any benefit from using 2 weapons to shoot his short burst rather than twice 1 weapon.

As far as I recall the rules, it say the penalty is by bullet shot after the first in the round, I dont recall it specificating with the same gun.

You can't exactly say that this isn't RAI, because quite frankly, if you do shoot one gun after the other, you suffer less recoil. (Assuming a base level of shooting ability and strength etc)

[capt.pantsless]

You can also double your rate-of-fire - e.g. have a Ruger Super Warhawk in each hand and fire them independently, one in each simple action. You still get to keep your whole dice-pool, plus you get the super-manly 6P damage.

[IKerensky]

I was refering to my RAI (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

And I really fail to see how you suffer less recoil by shooting the weapon one after the other, RAI or otherwise.

[Wulffyre]

I was refering to my RAI (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

And I really fail to see how you suffer less recoil by shooting the weapon one after the other, RAI or otherwise.

My fault then for misinterpreting

But generally, you do suffer less recoil.

Assuming you have a pistol in both hands, the recoil of one hand will, if even, barely affect your other hand, because Pistolrecoil is usally manageable, unless we talk about absurdly high caliber (i.e .50 or .444). So practically you absorb most of the recoil with your arm and shoulder and that leaves your other arm relatively stable for another shot. (Naturally this does take training, but any runner that dual wields, would have sufficient enough training to do so effectively)

[capt.pantsless]

Naturally this does take training, but any runner that dual wields, would have sufficient enough training to do so effectively

I'd generally argue that anything that 'takes training' is something that will reduce one's dice-pool. Doing something hard reduces die-pools or increases thresholds. Training is represented by having big die pools. Getting one hand moved around IS going to transfer SOME of the force through your whole body, including the other shooting hand. The big question is how much, and is it worth the effort to make things more realistic?

Personally, I'd rather avoid any house-rules for other-hand fighting, but if someone was shooting, say, an assault-cannon in one hand, I'd probably transfer half of the uncompensated recoil to the other hand.

[Wulffyre]

I'd generally argue that anything that 'takes training' is something that will reduce one's dice-pool. Doing something hard reduces die-pools or increases thresholds. Training is represented by having big die pools. Getting one hand moved around IS going to transfer SOME of the force through your whole body, including the other shooting hand. The big question is how much, and is it worth the effort to make things more realistic?

Personally, I'd rather avoid any house-rules for other-hand fighting, but if someone was shooting, say, an assault-cannon in one hand, I'd probably transfer half of the uncompensated recoil to the other hand.

Agreed, but mind, that I am only talking about pistol sized weapons here, where the recoil is barely noticeable anyway.

And for the matter of Assault Cannon in one hand. If somebody is stupid enough to try that in my game, I'd simply tell him to go and fetch himself somebody that can mend his halfway ripped off arm. We only allow Assaultcannons to be fired either in prone or in crouching position.

[sabs]

Agreed, but mind, that I am only talking about pistol sized weapons here, where the recoil is barely noticeable anyway.

And for the matter of Assault Cannon in one hand. If somebody is stupid enough to try that in my game, I'd simply tell him to go and fetch himself somebody that can mend his halfway ripped off arm. We only allow Assaultcannons to be fired either in prone or in crouching position.

Even for a troll with a 11+ str? who has 2 points of natural RC?

[Mäx]

And I really fail to see how you suffer less recoil by shooting the weapon one after the other, RAI or otherwise.

Because your 2 guns have double the RC compared to 1 similar gun.

[capt.pantsless]

Agreed, but mind, that I am only talking about pistol sized weapons here, where the recoil is barely noticeable anyway.

I totally agree - but what if someone's packing a machine-pistol? Or even going out on a limb and trying to wield an assault rifle with one hand?

And for the matter of Assault Cannon in one hand. If somebody is stupid enough to try that in my game, I'd simply tell him to go and fetch himself somebody that can mend his halfway ripped off arm. We only allow Assaultcannons to be fired either in prone or in crouching position.

I was half-joking about the Assault Cannon - the average human should usually be minus 1 arm after firing. However - I'm usually more lenient on big giant cybered-up trolls and even Orks sometimes. Its POSSIBLE, but not very accurate to be firing a big-gun one-handed. Recoil transferring from hand-to-hand is another good way to model that.

[KarmaInferno]

I totally agree - but what if someone's packing a machine-pistol? Or even going out on a limb and trying to wield an assault rifle with one hand?

I feel compelled to re-post this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4nfZu8VqgQ




-k