If dice pools are split up, then how does it help you in any way to have two weapons?

only thing I can think of is to wait till you build your skill up and when it is high enough you just have extra-dice to distribute

[edit] eh, never mind

and just remember Acid, RoadFlares/BlowTorches, Shanks, PepperSpray/MACE
Also is it possible to have PepperSpray/MACE intergrated into a Cyberarm?

I have a question, if you have a skill recorder does it add a dice to each pool?

Actually, that's a good point. If you split your pool, do Dice Pool modifiers then apply to both? If so, it's not quite so bad.

Dice Pool Modifiers are applied after splitting your Dice Pool (p. 141). So, yes, anything modifying your pool applies to both parts.

The german errata (i'm still waiting for the english version of this), howsoever, changed the description of the Reflex Recorder. It now adds to the skill directly, and doesn't provide bonus dice. Thus it falls under the skill cap, and will be splitted with your dice pool.

Penalties apply, too. So TWF while blind is just nigh-impossible.

You'd think it'd be actually more effective, what with twice the flailing going on.

Deadly combo is the hidden gun arm slides. Arm yourself as a free action. Two weapon fighting allows a shot with each gun on a Simple Action...thus SA pistols have 2 shots each(4 shots total). Sure, you'll get higher damage straigh up with one weapon, but again, having to dodge(and soak), Base Damage or Base Damage +1 or so FOUR times is pretty rough.

Has any noticed that no one who actually knows what they're doing IRL uses two guns? You never see SWAT team guys breaking into a house with two SMG's, etc. It's only in make believe land that it's effective. The best reason to carry two guns is to save time on reloading.

My point is, I think it's a good thing that they basically made two gun fighting useless.

Maybe do the same as for guns. This could make it much more dangerous to use monowhips, since there is a higher chance of glitching.

I dont mind splitting dice pools, I just wish it was splitting pools after all the mods and letting things like smartgun links work. As is it feels weaker than just using one gun, and this is after spending points on ambidexterity to make it a feasible option. If your going to spend points it should at the very least be an equal option.

But, it is feasible - at least against foes that aren't full body armored Trolls.

Or did i miss something (look at my previous post above) ?

SR is NOT in any way modeled on reality. Except in the rare case that it would allow us to make characters stronger.

Part of the problem is that the game very poorly models reach because it assumes that reach is always an advantage. Sometimes it's a marked disadvantage. Imagine trying to use a polearm on someone grappling you. The guy grappling has a big advantage at that point. IMO, there really should be a "close" maneuver available which ends up inverting reach bonuses (+2=-2, for example). Wielding two weapons with different reaches could address this (sword+dagger, for example); you end up using the more favorable of the reach bonuses, basically.

Another point is the fact that you can parry with one weapon while engaging with the other. I would argue that an individual wielding two weapons should get at least part of the full-defense parry bonus without actually having to commit to full defense. (Personally, I revile the shield-as-armor behavior (when in melee). In melee, it's a parrying device, not armor. In melee, it should add dice to your parry action, not your armor).

This is the point where we should crunch some numbers .

I probably will, after christmas... this year i am the host (for the first time) of the family christmas event (and our christmas is from the 24th to the 26th ...).

I'll not that gyroharnesses no longer inflict penalties in melee.

How do you know that the SWAT teams don't duel weild SMGs? If memory serves, the main reasons to avoid doing so is because you handle recoil poorly, and because you have difficulty lining up the sights properly. The former is solved with a gyroharness, the latter with Smartlinks.

read the quote. then look at the username of the person who posted the response to it.

there's your answer.

Two weapon fighting can also be used to try to do damage on both tracks - i.e. stun and physical, by using different weapons and ammo. Also might be worth doing if you blow your edge for a one-off attack - hitting the dude with that chair leg you just grabbed before shanking him with your monoknife.

In some ways, a game system has to be built around the stupid options to maintain player freedom - take it too far down the "Two gun shooting is useless so we won't include rules for it" road and you'll end up just pushing buttons on your XBOX.

In another thread, Someone (I don't remember who, but I don't want to take credit for their Idea) noted that nowhere does it say you have to split your dice pools Evenly. So there is some tactical advantage to two weapon fighting if you go this route:

Simple action 1: First shot, use 1 die from pool. Opponent dodges (Probably successfully). Second shot, Use pool -1. Opponent dodges with -1 to their dodge pool (Due to previous dodge).

This may seem like an even trade off, but remember, you are rolling agilty+skill+mods, and your enemy is rolling just their reaction. Losing 1 die means a lot more to them than it does to you.

Simple action 2: First shot, use 1 die from pool. Opponent dodges with -2 to their dodge pool. Second shot, Use pool -1. Opponent dodges with -3 to their dodge pool.

Now we're starting to see a real numbers advantage. You average, unmodified human is now unable to dodge your last shot at all due to dice pool modifiers.



As of now there are no official rules for two weapon melee, but it is safe to assume you split your dice pool just like ranged melee. I'd say that each weapon's reach bonus applies to it's own attack roll separately. But with this you can use teh same tactic as above, to similar effect.

I think this models the concept really well. The main advantage to two weapon fighting is filling the air with lead so your opponent will more likely get hit by one bullet. When using two melee weapons, your off hand weapon is used to parry and to threaten your opponent, but rarely do you hit with two weapons at once. You use the threat of one to force an opening you can exploit with the other.

Also, remember that you spend edge per roll, so when two weapon fighting you can spend edge on both rolls separately. That may even the odds ab it if you are edge happy.

it's hard to penalise pole arm use when anyone skilled in it, can use it effecitvley at a shorter range also...

Ie stop grabbing it at the longer end and half way up the halft....

I've been kicking around an idea for new two-weapon fighting rules, though they still need some work.

Basically, if you want to dual-wield in either melee or ranged, you start with a -6 penalty to both attacks, which is increased to -8 if the weapons are oversized (rifles, for example). Ambidexterity reduces the penalties of two-weapon fighting by two, though an increase in cost to 10 BP may be warranted. Smartlinks, weapon foci and other bonuses are applied to each weapon as normal.

Obviously, this system could use some tweaking, but it's a start. What do you think?

sounds like you play dnd too much =p

/me think the rules are O-K as is.
Dual wielding forearm is for the pros, hence only doing it when the splicing dice pool is of fair amount. Otherwise you can just use the no-even dice pool splicing to demonstrate the only thing you whant is fill the air with flying lead.

The rules for splicing dice pool only affect firing 2weapons in the same IP, wich means that if you got 2IP you can fire from different gun each time (and then use RugewrSuperWarhawk). As a GM I would allow the SmartGun switch between guns, as this seems to be an issue (havent look at it yet).

As for melee dual wielding, I think the same rules could be applied.

remember: SR4 is meant to be easy with less bookkeeping than before. I dont think it was meant to come up with that much of new rules.

This topic has been covered a billion times in the past. I suggest searching the forums for previous threads regarding two weapon fighting. If you have a serious problem not being able to fire two weapons, talk to your GM. Using a character that uses two pistols a lot, I have no problem splitting dice pools. There's always the considering firing single weapons once per simple action and still only getting your two shots in.

solution to switching between smartlinks = two monocles, each with a smartlink and image link.

now you don't need to switch, you have two completely separate systems

(of course, this assumes your GM is a crazy person who restricts you from, say, simply color coding your targetting sight from the smartlink, which really shouldn't be a problem. heck, they had the tech for wielding dual smartguns years ago, i fail to see why they would have somehow mysteriously lost it since then)

Perfect sight and an effective smartlink for that matter would require both eyes. Besides, have you ever seen someone with two monocles? It looks stupid.

so turn them into a pair of glasses. it's not like sticking a little piece of wire between them is gonna force them to act as one or anything.

and while i agree that realistically, you should have to be using something that covers both eyes, the RAW don't reflect that, in the sense that you have just as good vision enhancements and whatnot if you have only the one monocle.

The problem with having two smartlinks is simple (one for each eye). Everyone has one dominant eye, with both eyes open, you can only shoot accurately by aiming with your dominant eye.

Want proof - try this. Make a circle with your thumb and index finger. Hold the circle up and look through it with both eyes open. Centre it on a distant object - 10 feet or so should do.

Now close your right eye - what happened? Is your ring still centered on the object?

Now close your left eye, don't forget to open your right eye first - what happened?

When you closed one eye, the ring should have stayed on target - the open eye is your dominant eye. What happened when using the other eye, the ring (or sight, or smartlink croshair) moved off target.

The result of this biologic fact - you can't aim two guns at once no mater what type of sighting system you use. Your brain won't let you.

I forgot to add that is is impossible to focus on two things at once.

Hold a newspaper in your peripheral vision and try and read it without looking directly at it. Its impossible, you can see there are words there, but you can't read them. In order to read, aim at, or observe something in detail, you must look at it directly. This of course means that you can only look at one thing at a time.

Given these two facts, the rules for two gun fighting are pretty reasonable.

It would be nice if they'd provided rules for two melee weapon fighting, though.

I did exactly as you said (already the first time i tried, btw). With extended arm. Same difference.
If i use the right hand, my left eye focuses, and with my left hand it's my right eye.

There are a ton of different ways to figure out your eye dominance.

The method I used for archery classes was to hold out both hands at arms' length, fingers out flat but together (like a paddle), thumbs stretched out all the way -- and lay your hands together so that you make about a quarter-sized hole between the webby-bits by your thumbs (this is ridiculously difficult to describe, and retardedly easy to do IRL, or show someone).

EDIT -- I just found this, which shows what I'm talking about.

Look at something through that hole. Then smoothly, while still staring at that "something" through the little hole, pull your hands in towards your face. You'll draw that hole up to your dominant eye, unless you're purposefully not doing so -- which is to say this worked with every archery class I ever taught, except for one or two goofy 12 year old kids who wanted to "prove" it didn't work.

I'm not real sure what this really has to do with two-weapon melee combat any more, but I thought I'd offer up another method of determining eye dominance.

Have you actualy tried using the split die system in a game? I have a player who uses it and it works great, almost TO great.

The player in question usualy uses Twin SMG's, has 5 in Automatics and 7 in Agility and ambidexterity, total of 12 dice. He splits the dice evenly (6 per gun), and then we add modifiers, his smartlink and/or lasersight do not apply, but his tracer ammo does. He fires twin short wide burts, which his recoil compensation full compensates (for the first burst), using tracer ammo. Giving him a total of 7 dice per gun. He get's an average of 2.3 successes, per gun. That's an average of 7.3P damage x2 or 14.6P.

The average target doesn't doge (they are to busy shooting) and has an average agility of somewhere around 6 (probably less, but lets asume that). That means he would gets an average of 2 successes and be missed 2/3 of time EXCEPT that the player in question uses dual wide bursts. This subtracts 2 dice from his roll. Leaving him with only 4 dice and an average of 1.3 success, he gets hit for 12P on average.

If the target looks likely to actively doge him he can switch into full auto mode and use a long burst. He goes down to 5 dice per gun (1.6 successes) but his target loses 4 dice from their dodge pool, against a non-dodging target this results in slightly less damge (11.3P), but he is more likely to hit a dodging target.

If the character in question only used one gun, he would throw more dice (15), but would do less damage (8.6P on average) and narrow bursts would do worse.

--------

Now these examples are pretty simple and assume no other modifiers apply (which usualy do), but even so a basic principle applies. If you can hit the target with half your pool, then you are generaly better off splitting the dice. Adepts with large very large pools to throw can be downright scarry. (Lucky for me, the my John-Wo wannbe character is a Sam, though I think throwing a dual wielding adept at him might be fun...)