IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Why two weapons fighting is the way it is?
Cynic project
post Feb 14 2005, 02:35 AM
Post #1


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,032
Joined: 6-August 04
Member No.: 6,543



Okay, you have a huge edge that costs a whole lot points at the start and even more after you make your character. You get it for about 6-8 character points when making your character and about 60-80 afterwards.

But,why do they need to make two weapon fighting such a big deal? As far as I can tell from the rules you either are not as good someone with one weapon or are totally roxor.What I am trying to get at, is that there doesn't seem to be middle ground.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Feb 14 2005, 03:09 AM
Post #2


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 16,888
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



Sure there is. Someone with a low off-hand weapon skill will be more or less equal to someone who spent the same amount of time training on a single weapon.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cynic project
post Feb 14 2005, 03:41 AM
Post #3


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,032
Joined: 6-August 04
Member No.: 6,543



Yes, but the problem is that aide form the huge edge it is rather easy for the two weapon master to out streach the one wiht only one weapon.

I mean, I do not wish to make two weapon fight worse than one weapon fighting, but I do think that styles should not have game mechanical advantages.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Feb 14 2005, 04:34 AM
Post #4


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,327
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



Two weapon fighting is the way it is because the advanced melee/martial arts rules in SR are painful and make me want to die.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Feb 14 2005, 04:42 AM
Post #5


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



fighting with two weapons seems okay to me. you pay lots of extra karma, and get a decent bonus.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Feb 14 2005, 05:55 AM
Post #6


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,327
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



It's so tacky, though, so D&D.

OMG I AM LEVEL 22 PALADIN W. DUAL WIELDED HOLY AVENGER AND WAKIZUSHI I GET 30 ATTACKS PER ROUND AND DOUBLE DAMAGE HAR HAR HUR HUR LOL OMG WTF CHECK OUT MY STACKING FEATS FOR +10 TO HIT HUR HUR HUR.

That's really what I think every time I read the dual wielding rules.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Feb 14 2005, 06:02 AM
Post #7


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 16,888
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



Except it isn't. Remotely. It offers a fairly small advantage compared to cost in the hands of anyone but Adepts, and even then only if the GM allows the Improved Ability dice to be part of the half main skill added for Ambidex. Hell, it even makes a certain amount of sense that having a parrying weapon would offer you greater opportunity to hit and less to be hit if you're properly trained. The only part I could see being argued as silly is the Ambidex edge.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Arethusa
post Feb 14 2005, 06:08 AM
Post #8


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,901
Joined: 19-June 03
Member No.: 4,775



Honestly, I'd find it a lot more reasonable if the price were halved for mundanes, or, at the very least, cut back by 2 with a note for GMs to cut it back further at their discretion in the event of a mundane not focusing on melee. As it is now, it is unreasonably expensive for everyone but those adepts.

As for its rule functionality, I don't like it at all, but I don't find it entirely unreasonable within the abstracted structure of SR's melee rules. Really, if anything, I find that the melee rules just underline the inherent problems in SR's approach to melee.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Austere Emancipa...
post Feb 14 2005, 06:29 AM
Post #9


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,889
Joined: 3-August 03
From: A CPI rank 1 country
Member No.: 5,222



If you remove the Ambidexterity edge, fighting with two weapons will (realistically?) offer no real edge over fighting with one weapon. The Karma cost progression for skills combined with the fact that most one-hand weapons have at most Reach 1 while 2-hand weapons often have Reach 2 makes for a nice balance, where fighting with 2 weapons has a slight edge in some circumstances while a single weapon may have a slight edge in others.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Feb 14 2005, 06:30 AM
Post #10


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



i'm not sure i understand why it should be more expensive for adepts (or mages, for that matter).

and the only way a paladin could get 30 attacks per round is if he multi-classed as a dervish. so there !!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John Campbell
post Feb 14 2005, 06:34 AM
Post #11


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,027
Joined: 9-November 02
From: The Republic of Vermont
Member No.: 3,581



That's odd, because Shadowrun's handling of two-weapon combat is absolutely nothing at all like D&D in any way. It doesn't allow second attacks; it just adds a few dice to the melee test.

And nowhere near enough dice, IMAO. All else being equal, the guy with two swords should eat the guy with one sword for lunch, even without special training in using a second sword or any particular degree of abnormal ambidexterity. Simply having a blocking implement in your off hand, even if you can't attack competently with it, is a huge advantage.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Arethusa
post Feb 14 2005, 06:37 AM
Post #12


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,901
Joined: 19-June 03
Member No.: 4,775



Except it also negates the speed and versaility of using a single weapon as it was intended, which is a huge disadvantage, and is one of the many complex dynamics of melee combat SR is wholly incapable of modeling.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Glyph
post Feb 14 2005, 07:11 AM
Post #13


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,665
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,449



Shadowrun melee combat is an opposed dice contest. How can anyone think that increasing your base number of dice by 50% is underpowered? 6 Edge points is not that much to spend, to increase your skill of 6 to, essentially, a skill of 9 (the only difference being that you can still only add 6 Combat Pool dice, not 9). The benefit is even more extreme for adepts or mages with weapon foci... or, worst (or best :)) of all, adepts of the magical way with both.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John Campbell
post Feb 14 2005, 08:11 AM
Post #14


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,027
Joined: 9-November 02
From: The Republic of Vermont
Member No.: 3,581



Well, under SR rules, two-sword totally owns single-sword. But it should.

It's fairly evenly matched against greatsword, because the greatsword will typically have a 1-point Reach advantage, and TN modifiers trump additional dice. 9 dice against TN 5 vs. 6 dice at TN 4 puts them in a dead heat for average successes, and the greatsword will be doing more damage when it lands. Figure in Combat Pool, and the greatsword has the advantage in average successes, too. This is actually somewhat contrary to my real-world experience, which tells me that the greatsword will get maybe two free blows before the two-sword closes range, and if he doesn't land them - and, unless he has a large skill advantage, he usually won't - he's toast.

My real complaint is that getting those extra dice requires either dumping a fuckload of Karma into a second skill at 6, or taking the 6-point Ambidexterity Edge, when my real-world experience, again, tells me that a competent swordsman can get a real advantage simply by picking up the second weapon. It doesn't require any unusual degree of ambidexterity, and, while training certainly helps, getting competent with the second weapon isn't anywhere near twice as difficult as getting competent with the first, and there's a real advantage even without any special training.

Under SR rules, if you don't have either Ambidexterity or a special Off-Hand skill, you're far better off sticking to one sword. Getting half your Quickness in extra dice very seldom comes anywhere near making up for the +4 TN modifier and losing access to your Combat Pool. (I'm tempted to say "never", but I haven't made the effort to prove that it holds even for pathological builds.) Again, that's directly contrary to my real-world experience, which tells me that if you've got a hand free, carrying a second weapon in it can only help.


This is all, of course, leaving aside the fact that, under SR rules, it's impossible to fight with two swords, ever.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Feb 14 2005, 08:16 AM
Post #15


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,327
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



Well, what I mostly meant is that I don't like having a separate set of dual wielding rules because it's *tacky*, not that it is similar rules wise.

In other words, going and setting up a special set of rules so that someone can use two melee weapons instead of one is basically adding something to the game that dosen't need to be there and which is popular only because RPG players have been doing absurd dual wielding in D&D for years now.

It's like this one time that I was hanging out on the official Knights of the Old Republic Forum and some guy dropped in making a thread with bad spelling and grammar where he basically said that he wanted "more" from the lightsabers, namely lightscythes. And that was painfully stupid because it was *tacky*. The idea of a lightscythe has nothing to do with Star Wars and would only be considered by someone who wanted to run around being a D&D character, in effect.

The dual wield rules are the same way. The only reason that you'd even want a rule for that is if you wanted to imitate some crazy super aggrandized D&D character. If you just wanted to use two melee weapons (like, fencing sword and dagger) in-character you wouldn't *need* a rule for that. It could just be flavor text. But to sit down and make a pointless rule just so that you can do the same stuff that the D&D guys do...I think it's silly.

Okay, one last attempt by me to make clear what I am getting at. Imagine that you're playing Shadowrun, and you have a character with a sword who can do melee really well. I dunno, let's say you're a physad with 12 dice. So, over the course of the adventure you end up in close combat but thanks to that +1 reach you chop here and parry there and snicker snack you slice up all these security guards. So, then the GM unveils this NPC who also likes swords, and you decide to engage this NPC with your physad in suitably dramatic fashion. But, oho, what's this? The GM decided to make the NPC a SUPER DUAL WIELD CHARACTER, who swings a sword in one hand and a pair of nunchuks in the other. All of a sudden you find yourself getting beaten down unambiguously by a NPC who is statistically similar to you but who wins because like some whacked out D&D character he's swinging two weapons. And, like, if it never would have occured to you to take dual wielding at chargen, and if you think that the concept of swinging two weapons and having it be treated as a big big advantage in terms of game mechanics is weird and so just didn't bother with that rule, you'll probably feel annoyed. You'll think, "My god, that NPC is *tacky*."

Like, it's not really easy to justify in real-world terms why a guy who is using a single sword should be at a disadvantage against some guy swinging around a similar sword one-handed while he twirls nunchuaku in his other hand. Instead, it sounds like something from a martial arts anime, where some guy runs around with a bizarre weapon combat method and has some convoluted bullshit excuse as to why it's better. And yet the big advantage is there for the taking for whomever realizes first that going down that path brings statistical power.

(for my objection from a technical standpoint, please see the post below)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Feb 14 2005, 08:23 AM
Post #16


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,327
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



QUOTE (John Campbell)

My real complaint is that getting those extra dice requires either dumping a fuckload of Karma into a second skill at 6, or taking the 6-point Ambidexterity Edge, when my real-world experience, again, tells me that a competent swordsman can get a real advantage simply by picking up the second weapon. It doesn't require any unusual degree of ambidexterity, and, while training certainly helps, getting competent with the second weapon isn't anywhere near twice as difficult as getting competent with the first, and there's a real advantage even without any special training.

I don't have any experience sparring with long blades, so I can't say anything from personal experience, but I do have one question I would pose.

If using 2 blades instead of 1 is unambigously better *and* easy to do, then how come everyone dosen't always use two blades? For example, pocket sized knives are easy to carry. Why does a lot of arnis then deal with using one blade, and not with using two blades? Why are there schools of fencing where one-sword type fencing is emphasized...why dosen't everyone do two blade fencing?

What I would say from personal background is that it's fallacious if we're talking about, say, a short stick to treat one short stick as only one weapon, and two short sticks as two weapons. If you only have one short stick, you also have one empty hand. The empty hand can play a direct defensive or offensive role if you're trying to beat someone down. The empty hand can punch, it can grab someone's arm, and it can be used in tandem with your one stick to execute a stick-based joint lock or choke.

But fundamentally the SR two weapon system dosen't recognize that sort of thing. If it did, having a free hand should logically give you +50% based on your unarmed combat skill.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JaronK
post Feb 14 2005, 08:36 AM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 942
Joined: 13-May 04
Member No.: 6,323



QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)
If using 2 blades instead of 1 is unambigously better *and* easy to do, then how come everyone dosen't always use two blades? For example, pocket sized knives are easy to carry. Why does a lot of arnis then deal with using one blade, and not with using two blades? Why are there schools of fencing where one-sword type fencing is emphasized...why dosen't everyone do two blade fencing?

What I would say from personal background is that it's fallacious if we're talking about, say, a short stick to treat one short stick as only one weapon, and two short sticks as two weapons. If you only have one short stick, you also have one empty hand. The empty hand can play a direct defensive or offensive role if you're trying to beat someone down. The empty hand can punch, it can grab someone's arm, and it can be used in tandem with your one stick to execute a stick-based joint lock or choke.

But fundamentally the SR two weapon system dosen't recognize that sort of thing. If it did, having a free hand should logically give you +50% based on your unarmed combat skill.

As a rather practiced duel wielder (rapiers, rapier and dagger, double morning star, double whip, double broad sword), I'd say two weapons is definitely better than one with only a minor amount of training... a few hours at most.

With only minor trading, the offhand provides mostly a defensive bonus, allowing easy parrying and the blocking of one avenue of attack. Every once in a while, it allows an attack of opportunity... these won't be capitalized upon often by a novice, but they do come up. In this case, a pocket knife in the offhand really won't do much, as it can't block a darn thing.

Once you get better, you start becoming more fluid with your attacks. You can connect your mainhand actions to your offhand... double parries, double attacks, feignts with one hand leading to attacks with the other, etc. Not super effective, but it'll throw the enemy offgaurd. This is with a week or so of training.

After a month in, you start to look very proficient. Now, I can't speak for the ambidexterous, but for me, I still have problems thinking of my left hand as an independent hand. Instead, it's all connected to my right, so instead of thinking "left hand parry, right hand attack" I have a few combined moves, such as a left hand high parry with a right hand low stab, and it always feels like my right hand is leading, even if it goes second. At this point, though, the second weapon is quite powerful, since any time the opponent tries to stop an offhand attack, they leave themselves open for the mainhand.

To answer your question directly... pocket knives can't parry, and in many cases a fist is more flexible anyway, so duel wielding them isn't so great. With swords though... they're expensive. One is plenty. And nobody really wants to carry around two. Yes, duel wielding would be more powerful, but in dueling, that would be cheating, and in war, you do get tired more quickly with two weapons, so it's not a good idea there (besides, in midevil times, people were cheap, weapons were expensive... a single duel wielding soldier cost nearly as much as two soldiers with one sword). Also, for an untrained solder, duel wielding is primarily defensive, and a shield does that better.

JaronK
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Glyph
post Feb 14 2005, 08:41 AM
Post #18


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,665
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,449



QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)
But fundamentally the SR two weapon system dosen't recognize that sort of thing.  If it did, having a free hand should logically give you +50% based on your unarmed combat skill.

... but it doesn't. If you are using two shock gloves though, then you do get the bonuses of ambidexterity. SR rules tend to make your head hurt if you think about them too long. :wobble: :rotate: :spin:
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Edward
post Feb 14 2005, 09:59 AM
Post #19


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,073
Joined: 23-August 04
Member No.: 6,587



Why should the cost be reduced for mandarins it has exactly the same effect for a mundane or a magical (adepts get a very slight advantage). It is useful to somebody that makes use of it. And anybody that wont be making use of it should not be taking it.

Things like sensitive system and blind have differing values because magicians would not have taken much cyber ware anyway (in theory) and can use astral perception to see.

You could reduce the cost for somebody that doesn’t carry 2 weapons but that would be like reducing the cost of the cracker edge for non deckers.

I would point out to john camble that all swords (and some long knives included in “sword” in SR3 have reach one.

Arguably a great sword would have reach 2 (making his assessment correct) but stats for the great sword have never been included in the books.

The reason you have to pay for the skill or a 6 point edge to do this is game balance, plain and simple.i can not coment on what the real case is

I agree with the absurdity of no wielding 2 swords (katana, & wakasashi, long sword and short sword, of even Florentine style 2 long swords). These are traditional styles and I can see no mechanics advantage to them if they where simply allowed

Also consider the stun baton, essentially a club with electrical contacts, you can have 2 clubs or stun baton and club but 2 stun batons would be to heavy.

Edward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Feb 14 2005, 12:42 PM
Post #20


Immoral Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 15,247
Joined: 29-March 02
From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat
Member No.: 2,486



QUOTE (Edward)
Arguably a great sword would have reach 2 (making his assessment correct) but stats for the great sword have never been included in the books.

Well, arguably the Claymore listed in CC is considered a Great Sword, even though it is categorized in Shadowrun canon as a polearm.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Edward
post Feb 14 2005, 02:26 PM
Post #21


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,073
Joined: 23-August 04
Member No.: 6,587



I see, it is indeed listed as a pole arm and dose have a reach of 2 as I thought it should.

I just didn’t think to look for the fraging big swords under pole arms. Any idea why they are there.

Edward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Edward
post Feb 14 2005, 02:30 PM
Post #22


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,073
Joined: 23-August 04
Member No.: 6,587



Another thought.

Can and should a troll be able to wield a greater range of weapons as primary or secondary melee weapons.

Eg claymore and long sword (katana stats)

Edward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Feb 14 2005, 03:00 PM
Post #23


Immoral Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 15,247
Joined: 29-March 02
From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat
Member No.: 2,486



QUOTE (Edward)
I just didn’t think to look for the fraging big swords under pole arms. Any idea why they are there.

Probably because the powers-that-be figured that the methods used to weild it are closer to how polearms are employed than how other edged weapons are used.

Other than that, your guess is as good as mine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
U_Fester
post Feb 14 2005, 03:14 PM
Post #24


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 230
Joined: 3-December 04
Member No.: 6,863



QUOTE (Glyph)
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)
But fundamentally the SR two weapon system dosen't recognize that sort of thing.  If it did, having a free hand should logically give you +50% based on your unarmed combat skill.

... but it doesn't. If you are using two shock gloves though, then you do get the bonuses of ambidexterity. SR rules tend to make your head hurt if you think about them too long. :wobble: :rotate: :spin:

but you do gain a power bonus if you have spurs in both hands. If you can hit with both hands and get a bonus for the second, why not for two knives?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Feb 14 2005, 05:56 PM
Post #25


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,327
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



QUOTE (Edward)
Why should the cost be reduced for mandarins

Because of their political connections within the Chinese imperial government system. They get everything at a reduced rate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st September 2014 - 10:08 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.