Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

[Lord Quintus]

When I read the stuff in the rulebook, I was lead to beleive that purchasing two-weapon fighting allows you to ignore penalties for the off-hand, effectivley giving you ambidexterity only for purposes of fighting with two weapons. Ambidexterity, while redundant for two-weapon fighting allows you to have no "off-hand" in any situation, not only when fighting with two weapons. Is my interperation correct according to everyone else?

I'll give an example for the heck of it: Tynell has two weapon fighting for the purposes of using handguns, but he does not have ambidexterity and is right handed. Ally has ambidexterity and likes to use her right hand a little more than her left, but she only uses one weapon at a time-a rapier. Dr. Malicious manages to break the right hands of both characters during a battle. Ally picks up her sword with her left hand and continues to fight without penalties. Tynell has dropped his right hand-gun, and begins to take penalties with his left-hand gun. Would this be correct?

On an unrelated note, there should be a :ninja: smiley.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

When I read the stuff in the rulebook, I was lead to beleive that purchasing two-weapon fighting allows you to ignore penalties for the off-hand, effectivley giving you ambidexterity only for purposes of fighting with two weapons. Ambidexterity, while redundant for two-weapon fighting allows you to have no "off-hand" in any situation, not only when fighting with two weapons. Is my interperation correct according to everyone else?

I'll give an example for the heck of it: Tynell has two weapon fighting for the purposes of using handguns, but he does not have ambidexterity and is right handed. Ally has ambidexterity and likes to use her right hand a little more than her left, but she only uses one weapon at a time-a rapier. Dr. Malicious manages to break the right hands of both characters during a battle. Ally picks up her sword with her left hand and continues to fight without penalties. Tynell has dropped his right hand-gun, and begins to take penalties with his left-hand gun. Would this be correct?

Yes, I believe that's correct.

On an unrelated note, there should be a :ninja: smiley.

Yes, I believe this should also be correct .

[ghost-angel]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

Those are the rules as I interpreted them.

 

Two Weapon Fighting only works when you actually fight with two weapons, the idea being you use the weapons weight and control to offset using your offhand, balance issues kind of thing. Ambidexterity means you're just as good with either hand at using stuff.

 

that's my explenation of why/how the rules work.

 

[i can agree on a need for a :ninja: smiley]

[TaxiMan]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

So my (not very related) question is this: If I have two-weapon fighting, did I just double the number of attacks I can make for 10 points? Is there no downside? Does it work for any type of power (EB, STR, HKA, etc)?

[Fenixcrest]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

It just lets you make a Sweep attack with two weapons implied. It's kinda like 3 5-point CSLs with "Only for OCV (-1)", and 2 2-point PSL's vs. Sweep. It ends up being more than 10 points, but I think there's prolly another limitation in there that I missed.. or it gets a discount for being a skill, and skills that cost 11 would be awkward. It also includes the rule that the sweep is to be used for two different attacks/maneuvers (the two weapons), which, unless I'm mistaken, is not normally allowed.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

TWF is just a newbie easy free Sweep or Rapidfire, tailor made for the various Drizzt and John Woo fan set.

 

Also, there is a suggestion in the FAQ that in campaigns where Sweep (and thus by extention Rapidfire) is allowed normally (remember that it is an Optional manuever and not necessarily allowed by default), that TWF be given some additional benny to make it worth paying 10 points for.

 

IIRC the suggestion is that a person TWFing just suffers a DCV penalty rather than going to 1/2 DCV.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

Here is a link to a previous discussion on TWF:

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13069&highlight=TWF

[austenandrews]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

I figure 2WF as Full Ambidexterity, Only For Sweep (-1) = 4 pts plus 2 PSLs for All Sweep Attacks = 6 pts. That's why ranged & HtH 2WF are separated, because Sweep and Rapid Fire are written up as separate maneuvers. Dunno if that was Steve's thinking, though.

 

-AA

[Dust Raven]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

So my (not very related) question is this: If I have two-weapon fighting' date=' did I just double the number of attacks I can make for 10 points? Is there no downside? Does it work for any type of power (EB, STR, HKA, etc)?[/quote']

As far as a "downside" it's involved in the use of the maneuvers (wither Sweep or Rapid Fire). Either one takes a Full Phase, puts you at 1/2 DCV and pulls a cumulative -2 OCV penalty for each target after the first, and once you miss a roll, you automatically miss any more you planned on making. Plus you still have to spend the END/Charges for each attack, successful or not.

 

What 2WF does is eliminate that first -2, but only if the first two attacks are with your two weapons, one each. Then it also eliminates the off hand penalty for your second weapon, and does this whether or not you attack with both weapons or just that one, but I think you have to have both weapons in hand to counter the penalty. It makes you proficient with a weapon in each hand, not either hand.

[austenandrews]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

My problem with 2WF is that its only real advantage over a plain Sweep is the 2 PSL's. Mechanically the extra weapon doesn't get you much. So really, a 6-pt skill winds up costing you 10 pts. That's why in some genres I'd be willing to allow 2WF fighting with, say, a pistol and a rapier. Otherwise you have to do what I wound up doing in my fantasy game, which is to nerf Sweep to justify the cost. Yuck.

 

-AA

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

As I noted above there is a FAQ suggestion for TWF in campaigns w/ Sweep as a standard action. Ill go ahead and quote it here for those not comfortable with looking in the FAQ:

 

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.

[austenandrews]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

I've kicked around various ideas for reconciling 2WF & Sweep/Rapid Fire. -2 DCV doesn't work for me, because I rely on the 1/2 DCV as a disincentive to using either 2WF or Sweep all the time. Presently I rule that the default Sweep can only apply to different targets, while the default Rapid Fire can only apply to the same target. But that's not very satisfying for me.

 

Luckily my fantasy game is on haitus. This issue is high on my "definitely resolve before restarting" list.

 

-AA

[Lord Quintus]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

I'm glad to see there's been some (positive and/or nonmalicious) response! I was somewhat afraid people would make fun of me for not being able to understand the rules. We really need to get that ninja smiley made.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

I'm glad to see there's been some (positive and/or nonmalicious) response! I was somewhat afraid people would make fun of me for not being able to understand the rules. We really need to get that ninja smiley made.

Mocking and such doesnt fly here, though abstruse and highly arcane debating on very minute points does occur quite frequently.

 

Almost all of the posters on this board are helpful, and a few are even well informed

[Lord Quintus]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

Mocking and such doesnt fly here, though abstruse and highly arcane debating on very minute points does occur quite frequently.

 

Almost all of the posters on this board are helpful, and a few are even well informed

Well that's good to know! It's almost like being in Japan! By the way Shrike, I like your signature. I'd like to say that out of those 10 people, I am among the former group rather than the latter. Happy April 11011th!

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

Well that's good to know! It's almost like being in Japan! By the way Shrike' date=' I like your signature. I'd like to say that out of those 10 people, I am among the former group rather than the latter. Happy April 11011th![/quote']

Im fond of it myself. The thing that cracks me up is that I have a large type print out of it on the outside of my cubicle wall, and on occasion one my fellow IT people will pop their head in and ask about what the other 8 types are.

 

A couple of other developers have even asked, which lead to some heavy jeering and general mockery as you might imagine.

 

What I like most about it is that in addition to being funny, it's also true, managing to reduce all people to a binary result set. Its good on several levels

[Dust Raven]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

My problem with 2WF is that its only real advantage over a plain Sweep is the 2 PSL's. Mechanically the extra weapon doesn't get you much. So really, a 6-pt skill winds up costing you 10 pts. That's why in some genres I'd be willing to allow 2WF fighting with, say, a pistol and a rapier. Otherwise you have to do what I wound up doing in my fantasy game, which is to nerf Sweep to justify the cost. Yuck.

 

-AA

 

It's not just PSLs versus Sweep; it's also PSLs versus the -3 off hand penalty. If you add it all up (3 point PSLs each, because it's will all attacks) you get quite a savings (well, 5 points, but that's still good).

[Lord Quintus]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

It's not just PSLs versus Sweep; it's also PSLs versus the -3 off hand penalty. If you add it all up (3 point PSLs each' date=' because it's will all attacks) you get quite a savings (well, 5 points, but that's still good).[/quote']

I must point out that DustRaven is quite right.

[austenandrews]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

It's not just PSLs versus Sweep; it's also PSLs versus the -3 off hand penalty. If you add it all up (3 point PSLs each' date=' because it's will all attacks) you get quite a savings (well, 5 points, but that's still good).[/quote']

 

My point is that if Sweep is a default maneuver, fighting with two weapons doesn't really give you much advantage over fighting with one weapon. You can attack with either weapon, or you can Sweep with both or either. That's not much different than attacking or Sweeping with one weapon. Sure you have two weapons to choose from, but one of them will probably be more effective for the given situation, and you could just as well use your off hand for something else like a shield. So with 2WF you're paying points to eliminate an offhand penalty that doesn't really penalize you in the first place.

 

Now if you rule that 2WF applies to all fighting with your offhand, and not just when you have two weapons, then you're right that the skill is worthwhile. Or if Sweep is only available to characters with 2WF.

 

-AA

[Dust Raven]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

My point is that if Sweep is a default maneuver, fighting with two weapons doesn't really give you much advantage over fighting with one weapon. You can attack with either weapon, or you can Sweep with both or either. That's not much different than attacking or Sweeping with one weapon. Sure you have two weapons to choose from, but one of them will probably be more effective for the given situation, and you could just as well use your off hand for something else like a shield. So with 2WF you're paying points to eliminate an offhand penalty that doesn't really penalize you in the first place.

 

Now if you rule that 2WF applies to all fighting with your offhand, and not just when you have two weapons, then you're right that the skill is worthwhile. Or if Sweep is only available to characters with 2WF.

 

-AA

Without 2WF, this is true. According to the rules for PSLs, you can't buy them to counteract the -2 OCV, but would need to buy CSLs instead, which are more expensive. If you go by the book, 2WF is rather cheap. You can use it with any weapons (assuming they are both ranged, or both HTH, whichever you buy it for), which makes it versitile.

 

Of course, there are cheaper ways to make two attacks on your Phase if Sweep an Rapid Fire are allowed normally. And you don't need to worry about off hand penalties.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

My point is that if Sweep is a default maneuver, fighting with two weapons doesn't really give you much advantage over fighting with one weapon.

-AA

 

If youll page up a few posts and read the quote I posted from the FAQ, or look in the FAQ regarding TWF directly, you'll see a way to acheive this.

[austenandrews]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

If youll page up a few posts and read the quote I posted from the FAQ' date=' or look in the FAQ regarding TWF directly, you'll see a way to acheive this.[/quote']

 

And in the next post, you'll see my response.

 

Reducing the DCV penalty doesn't work for me. I need some other solution. I don't really want to make Sweep & Rapid Fire require 2WF, but unfortunately no good alterative has presented itself.

 

-AA

[Dust Raven]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

And in the next post, you'll see my response.

 

Reducing the DCV penalty doesn't work for me. I need some other solution. I don't really want to make Sweep & Rapid Fire require 2WF, but unfortunately no good alterative has presented itself.

 

-AA

How do you currently handle Sweep and Rapid Fire in your campaings? Do characters pay for their equipment? These affect what 2TW can do.

 

Assuming a Superheroic game using Sweep and Rapid Fire as "stardard" maneuvers, 2TF is nearly worthless. You can work a round the effects with Powers much more easily. In this case I'd just change the cost of it, say maybe 6 points instead of 10 and have it work for all weapons (basically like buy full Ambidexterity with a -1/2 Limitation "Only With Weapons").

[austenandrews]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

My fantasy campaign is high-powered but "heroic." PCs don't pay points for weapons & armor. And ever since Sweep came out (was it first in the BBB? I forget) I've allowed it as a standard maneuver. However, not until my high-powered heroic game did PC DCVs overcome the 1/2 DCV limitation enough to make it a regular attack.

 

Previously I had nerfed Sweep so that the default maneuver required you to strike different targets, whereas 2WF allowed you to strike one target multiple times. And vice-versa for Rapid Fire - with the default you could only fire at one target multiple times, whereas 2WF allowed you to hit multiple targets.

 

But that's not very satisfying for me. Allowing 2WF to reduce the DCV penalty is even worse. So in lieu of another alternative, I'm stuck with either (a) disallowing Sweep & RF without 2WF or ( reducing the cost of 2WF so that it only offsets the first -2 for Sweep/RF. Alas I don't really care for those options, either.

 

-AA

[Krieghandt]

Re: Ambidexterity and two-weapon fighting.

 

You missing one of the more powerful effects of hth combat with 2 weapons, the sweep (bind) and attack. Bind the opponents weapon(s), and strike him. Or block and strike. or disarm and strike. or grab and strike. I dont have Fred with me, but if thats "not allowed", then the house rule would be, 2 WF allows 2 weapon/hand manuvers, sweep only allows a pair of attacks. Dont forget, the 2WF removes the offhand penalty, so that bind/block/disarm is going to be effective. And with a 1/2 DCV, your players are going to need some OCV based defenses. But I wouldnt allow a MA without a WF: 2 WF, and then it would be just the MA, no sweep or second attack.

 

As to defend the penalty in the original argument, in real life, most people have an attack hand and a defense hand, and when they are forced off hand, theire skill does go down noticably.

 

Krieghandt