JamesG
Aug 23rd, '03, 08:31 PM
There was some discussion on the boards about the Two-Weapon Fighting skill, and how its cost is inefficient as compared to Combat Skill Levels with Sweep. Some optional remedies were suggested on the FAQ page:
Q: Why should a character buy Two-Weapon Fighting (10 points) when he can simply buy two 2-point Combat Skill Levels with Sweep, and define the special effect as “fighting with a weapon in each hand”?
A: The cost for TWF is calculated based on CSLs to counteract the Sweep penalty, and Ambidexterity to counter the standard Off-Hand Penalty.
If you’re going to use the Sweep maneuver as a standard option in the campaign, the alternate route you suggest works better from a point-accounting standpoint.
However, not all campaigns use that Maneuver — it is specifically listed as optional — and for them, the more “traditional” TWF Skill might be appropriate even if characters normally cannot Sweep.
If you still want to use TWF as-is, but encourage people to take it instead of just two CSLs with Sweep, tack some other benefit onto it. For example, maybe if a character has TWF, he only suffers a -2 DCV penalty, instead of 1/2 DCV.
Q: Can a character with Two-Weapon Fighting Hold one of his attacks, or make one and then Abort the other to Block, or choose a Strike and Block as his two attacks?
A: Two-Weapon Fighting is based on, and uses, the mechanic for Rapid Fire/Sweep. As such, it constitutes a single maneuver. A character can’t Hold half of it, anymore than he could, for example, Hold half a Haymaker or half a Disarm. Similarly, he can’t Abort half of it, nor can he choose to perform a defensive action like Block — Sweep involves attacks, not defenses.
However, for those who think Two-Weapon Fighting is overpriced (see above), what this question describes — the ability to “split” the attack and Hold half, or Abort half — might be feasible as an “extra function” for the Skill, in the GM’s discretion.
These optional benefits for TWF also appear in FH5 on page 96.
Since I like the idea of TWF (despite its questionable historical realism), and do want to encourage players to take it instead of CSLs with Sweep, I’m inclined to allow both abilities. But some additional rules need to be placed around the second ability to spell it out more clearly.
Whenever performing a maneuver that could be part of a TWF combination, the player must declare whether he is using TWF or taking a single action. If using TWF, any drawbacks (such as the –2 DCV) take effect immediately and last until his next phase.
When making a TWF maneuver, a player may make a combo move (strike-strike, block-strike, bind-strike, etc) or make a single maneuver and hold the second. In the latter case, the held action cannot be taken until the next segment at the earliest. Of course, if the original maneuver was a block, additional blocks can be performed at the standard –2 per block without impacting the held action.
Characters using TWF may perform a double block (a block-block combo). What this means is if they fail to block the attack with their initial roll, they may immediately attempt a second block against that attack. If a player declares a double block and succeeds with the first block attempt, then the second block can be held. A character who declared a double block can also double block additional attacks that are launched at him before his next phase, but the –2 per additional block penalty can add up very quickly.
A player who decides to perform a maneuver and hold the second cannot change his mind and make it a combo move if the initial maneuver does not work out as expected.
These two additional abilities, particularly the second, make TWF fairly powerful. To keep it balanced, I’m thinking of adding a couple of new restrictions.
[list=1]
In some other game systems, TWF abilities are typically limited to lighter weapons, and I visualize TWF as being done with relatively light weapons. But by the current rules it is just as easy to use TWF with a pair of Battle Axes as it is a Rapier and dagger (assuming the character is strong enough). I propose penalties for using the skill with heavier weapons. At first I thought about basing the limits on the STR Mins of the weapons, but I think the new weapons tables are basically pretty whacked in that regard (but that’s another rant). So I settled on Damage Classes instead. If the combined DC total of the primary and secondary weapon is 6 or less, there is no penalty. Any greater and the following OCV penalties are incurred:
- DC total 7: -1 OCV primary weapon, -2 secondary
- DC total 8: -2 OCV primary weapon, -4 secondary
- DC total 9: -3 OCV primary weapon, -6 secondary
Etc.
For the purpose of this rule, the DC rating of a weapon should be modified as follows:
- Add 1 to the DC rating of a weapon that has +1 Stun Mult or Indirect (Hammers and Flails) or 2 if it has both.
- Add 2 to the DC rating for AP or Penetrating weapons.
- Add 1 DC for L weapons, add 2 for L2 weapons
- Subtract 1 for S weapons.
Penalty skill levels can be used to offset these minuses.
If using an alternate weapons table which bases the STR Min off of active points, like Geoff Speare’s, you can use combined STR Min to set the penalty thresholds with greater granularity.
TWF is a highly specialized skill, you can’t do it with just any two weapons. When purchased, you must specify the pair of weapons it works with. Additional pairs can be purchased for one CP each. Using the skill with weapon pairs not purchased entails the standard –3 unfamiliar weapon penalty. GMs can optionally reduce the penalty somewhat if the weapons used are similar to pairs that the character knows.
[/list=1]
Since limiting effective use of TWF to lighter weapons is a significant restriction, you might want to tack an additional bonus to the skill. I’m thinking of allowing the Rapid Attack skill to cancel the DCV penalty in addition to making TWF a half phase action.
The intended result of these suggestions is to make TWF “feel” distinctly different than Sweep. And note that CSLs with Sweep still have their place. Characters wielding heavy weapons can make good use of them, though the practitioner of TWF will be more versatile.
In addition to comments on this proposal, I’d be interested in hearing other’s experiences with the TWF skill and any special rules they introduced for it.
Q: Why should a character buy Two-Weapon Fighting (10 points) when he can simply buy two 2-point Combat Skill Levels with Sweep, and define the special effect as “fighting with a weapon in each hand”?
A: The cost for TWF is calculated based on CSLs to counteract the Sweep penalty, and Ambidexterity to counter the standard Off-Hand Penalty.
If you’re going to use the Sweep maneuver as a standard option in the campaign, the alternate route you suggest works better from a point-accounting standpoint.
However, not all campaigns use that Maneuver — it is specifically listed as optional — and for them, the more “traditional” TWF Skill might be appropriate even if characters normally cannot Sweep.
If you still want to use TWF as-is, but encourage people to take it instead of just two CSLs with Sweep, tack some other benefit onto it. For example, maybe if a character has TWF, he only suffers a -2 DCV penalty, instead of 1/2 DCV.
Q: Can a character with Two-Weapon Fighting Hold one of his attacks, or make one and then Abort the other to Block, or choose a Strike and Block as his two attacks?
A: Two-Weapon Fighting is based on, and uses, the mechanic for Rapid Fire/Sweep. As such, it constitutes a single maneuver. A character can’t Hold half of it, anymore than he could, for example, Hold half a Haymaker or half a Disarm. Similarly, he can’t Abort half of it, nor can he choose to perform a defensive action like Block — Sweep involves attacks, not defenses.
However, for those who think Two-Weapon Fighting is overpriced (see above), what this question describes — the ability to “split” the attack and Hold half, or Abort half — might be feasible as an “extra function” for the Skill, in the GM’s discretion.
These optional benefits for TWF also appear in FH5 on page 96.
Since I like the idea of TWF (despite its questionable historical realism), and do want to encourage players to take it instead of CSLs with Sweep, I’m inclined to allow both abilities. But some additional rules need to be placed around the second ability to spell it out more clearly.
Whenever performing a maneuver that could be part of a TWF combination, the player must declare whether he is using TWF or taking a single action. If using TWF, any drawbacks (such as the –2 DCV) take effect immediately and last until his next phase.
When making a TWF maneuver, a player may make a combo move (strike-strike, block-strike, bind-strike, etc) or make a single maneuver and hold the second. In the latter case, the held action cannot be taken until the next segment at the earliest. Of course, if the original maneuver was a block, additional blocks can be performed at the standard –2 per block without impacting the held action.
Characters using TWF may perform a double block (a block-block combo). What this means is if they fail to block the attack with their initial roll, they may immediately attempt a second block against that attack. If a player declares a double block and succeeds with the first block attempt, then the second block can be held. A character who declared a double block can also double block additional attacks that are launched at him before his next phase, but the –2 per additional block penalty can add up very quickly.
A player who decides to perform a maneuver and hold the second cannot change his mind and make it a combo move if the initial maneuver does not work out as expected.
These two additional abilities, particularly the second, make TWF fairly powerful. To keep it balanced, I’m thinking of adding a couple of new restrictions.
[list=1]
In some other game systems, TWF abilities are typically limited to lighter weapons, and I visualize TWF as being done with relatively light weapons. But by the current rules it is just as easy to use TWF with a pair of Battle Axes as it is a Rapier and dagger (assuming the character is strong enough). I propose penalties for using the skill with heavier weapons. At first I thought about basing the limits on the STR Mins of the weapons, but I think the new weapons tables are basically pretty whacked in that regard (but that’s another rant). So I settled on Damage Classes instead. If the combined DC total of the primary and secondary weapon is 6 or less, there is no penalty. Any greater and the following OCV penalties are incurred:
- DC total 7: -1 OCV primary weapon, -2 secondary
- DC total 8: -2 OCV primary weapon, -4 secondary
- DC total 9: -3 OCV primary weapon, -6 secondary
Etc.
For the purpose of this rule, the DC rating of a weapon should be modified as follows:
- Add 1 to the DC rating of a weapon that has +1 Stun Mult or Indirect (Hammers and Flails) or 2 if it has both.
- Add 2 to the DC rating for AP or Penetrating weapons.
- Add 1 DC for L weapons, add 2 for L2 weapons
- Subtract 1 for S weapons.
Penalty skill levels can be used to offset these minuses.
If using an alternate weapons table which bases the STR Min off of active points, like Geoff Speare’s, you can use combined STR Min to set the penalty thresholds with greater granularity.
TWF is a highly specialized skill, you can’t do it with just any two weapons. When purchased, you must specify the pair of weapons it works with. Additional pairs can be purchased for one CP each. Using the skill with weapon pairs not purchased entails the standard –3 unfamiliar weapon penalty. GMs can optionally reduce the penalty somewhat if the weapons used are similar to pairs that the character knows.
[/list=1]
Since limiting effective use of TWF to lighter weapons is a significant restriction, you might want to tack an additional bonus to the skill. I’m thinking of allowing the Rapid Attack skill to cancel the DCV penalty in addition to making TWF a half phase action.
The intended result of these suggestions is to make TWF “feel” distinctly different than Sweep. And note that CSLs with Sweep still have their place. Characters wielding heavy weapons can make good use of them, though the practitioner of TWF will be more versatile.
In addition to comments on this proposal, I’d be interested in hearing other’s experiences with the TWF skill and any special rules they introduced for it.