Two-handed fighting

[Ascolacicola]

I'm new to 5th ed. and I'm uncertain about using the rapid fire (though not new to 5th ed.) and two weapon fighting rules. Does the 1/2 dcv balance out the increased attack power? Does the additional cost for autofire (5 pt. skill) balance out potential abuses? I'm thinking about collapsing two-handed fighting for ranged and hth into one 10 point skill. Is that a bad idea? Has anyone made changes to the rules that have worked out for them?

 

I don't want to have to modify rules midstream so advance opinion would be greatly appreciated.

[Steve Long]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

Since this is a request for discussion, not a rules question, I've moved it to the "Discussion" board where anyone who likes can chime in.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

I didnt know we could say "face" on these boards

[prestidigitator]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

Hah! I guess the posting filter isn't applied to login names.

 

Anyway, the question intermixes a lot of stuff. Here are some things that might help resolve the confusion:

• The Rapid Autofire skill is only relavent for Autofire weapons or Powers. Otherwise it doesn't affect how you use Rapid Fire or Sweep (and those maneuvers through the Two-Weapon Fighting and Rapid Fire skills).
  
• If you really want any character who can attack effectively with two swords to be able to attack effectively with two pistols or thrown daggers or whatever, you can always choose to make Two-Weapon Fighting one Skill. Whether that will be balanced is going to be pretty game-specific (e.g. it might be reasonable in a fantasy campaign where most ranged weapons are likely to require two hands, but be a little unbalancing in a cyber-punk style game where there are a wide variety of commonly used HTH and ranged weapons, with many of each requiring only one hand).
  
• Being at 1/2 DCV does hurt a lot in my experience, and in the middle of a tight battle many PCs may be unwilling to take that risk unless it is really important (at least in relatively lethal heroic games). If you go with the option of Rapid Attack changing the DCV penalty to a flat -3, the risk involved is, of course, going to change depending on the normal DCV of the character (if their normal DCV is 4, the -3 hurts more than being at 1/2 DCV; if their normal DCV is 10, taking a -3 may not be all that bad).
  
• Remember that the character has poored a lot of points into being able to make another attack. They could actually have bought a whole additional point of Speed for that cost (though Normal Characteristic Maxima and such may change that). They still have the drawback of losing successive attack rolls if they miss one, and not being able to perform other maneuvers with their multiple attacks (because if you are using Sweep/Rapid Fire, you can't make a Haymaker, Move By/Through, Suppression Fire, etc.).

Hope those comments help a bit. If you have more specific questions, we should discuss those.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

Oh, I'll also share that in the fantasy adventure I just ran, the elven archer often took advantage of Rapid Fire with her bow. I don't believe she had Rapid Attack, but it probably didn't matter that much because she was always plunking away from a distance (so being able to move wan't always as important as it would be for a HTH fighter). She could hit well and pump out some damage, but I don't think it was unbalancing or made her outshine the other characters or anything. Occasionally the 1/2 DCV DID cause her some trouble (a wizard NAILED her back with some TK one time, and probably wouldn't have hit had she not used Rapid Fire).

 

NOTE: My bows don't use the full 1/2 DCV Concentration they are listed with in the book; they have a lesser form that only makes them 1/2 DCV against HTH attacks. If bows always gave the attacker the full 1/2 DCV penalty I think there would be more likelihood of archers using Rapid Attack just about all the time, which I don't really want.

 

The main HTH fighter of the group wasn't often willing to take Sweeps because he would get pounded. Sometimes a target really needed to be taken down and it was worth the risk, or it was a less critical battle in which they had to take out a bunch of grunts ("mooks;" whatever). He DID have HTH Rapid Fire. It really didn't make him unbalanced at all.

[austenandrews]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

The point cost of 2WF is only in line with its advantages if using Sweep requires the skill. In other words, if anyone can Sweep, 2WF is not really worth the points (except in a narrow range of conditions). I haven't cranked out the numbers, but what you propose might be a good solution.

[Ascolacicola]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

Thank you prestidigitaor, from your comments:

 

because it is a superheroic i'll go with the -3dcv instead of the half dcv, that way pc's get more bang for the buck. (plus the character interested in using it would be losing 5 dcv)

 

I hadn't calculated the opportunity cost of the full phase requirement,

 

I'll keep the extra 5 points for the autofire with rapid fire but possibly drop it if the autofire doesn't seem too overpowering.

 

can you answer one last question for me... can you use ranged martial arts maneuvers with firearms? Is it only for traditional ranged weapons?

 

thanks again!

[prestidigitator]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

Thank you prestidigitaor, from your comments:

 

because it is a superheroic i'll go with the -3dcv instead of the half dcv, that way pc's get more bang for the buck. (plus the character interested in using it would be losing 5 dcv)

 

I hadn't calculated the opportunity cost of the full phase requirement,

 

I'll keep the extra 5 points for the autofire with rapid fire but possibly drop it if the autofire doesn't seem too overpowering.

 

can you answer one last question for me... can you use ranged martial arts maneuvers with firearms? Is it only for traditional ranged weapons?

 

thanks again!

Oh. If this is Superheroic, Two-Weapon Fighting is normally not used at all. Superheros may attack at no offhand penalty with any and all attacks for which they have paid character points. Use 2-point CSLs with the Sweep and Rapid Fire maneuvers instead.

 

Martial Arts may be either ranged or HTH, I believe. If they are ranged, they may be used with the ranged attacks (Framework?) for which they were designed (firearms are really not treated differently from any other ranged attack), and you may add additional weapon elements as shown in the book. I'm not 100% certain of the rules there. Someone with more recent knowledge of the Martial Arts rules can probably give you a better answer. You might look through the Rules FAQs and the Rules Questions board for more info. I'm sure The Ultimate Martial Artist would be an excellent resource for this kind of question.

[azato]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

For some reason Two Weapon Fighting really confuses me. I am rather new to the game so please forgive the ignorace, but:

 

With sweep you can hit multiple times with the same weapon while with TWF you can hit multiple times with two different weapons? What is the advantage with having TWF? Do they work much differently? Is there a another example of TWF besides the one in the book (sorry Steve).

[radix]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

For some reason Two Weapon Fighting really confuses me. I am rather new to the game so please forgive the ignorace, but:

 

With sweep you can hit multiple times with the same weapon while with TWF you can hit multiple times with two different weapons? What is the advantage with having TWF? Do they work much differently? Is there a another example of TWF besides the one in the book (sorry Steve).

 

Your confusion seems to be thinking that Two Weapon Fighting is actually a combat maneuver used instead of Sweep -- but in fact it is just a skill that lessens the penalties of Sweep (or rapid fire) maneuvers that the player uses. Instead of reducing your DCV to 1/2 your current, it only takes off 2 points; and it allows you to ignore the first -2 penalty (so your attacks are at -0, -0, -2, -4, instead of -0, -2, -4, -6). It also allows you to ignore the -3 penalty for using an off-hand attack.

 

Anyway, this is clearly laid out in 5ER p73...

 

Also, Sweep doesn't restrict you to "the same weapon", only that they all be HTH attacks. 5ER 397 :-)

[azato]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

Your confusion seems to be thinking that Two Weapon Fighting is actually a combat maneuver used instead of Sweep -- but in fact it is just a skill that lessens the penalties of Sweep (or rapid fire) maneuvers that the player uses. Instead of reducing your DCV to 1/2 your current, it only takes off 2 points; and it allows you to ignore the first -2 penalty (so your attacks are at -0, -0, -2, -4, instead of -0, -2, -4, -6). It also allows you to ignore the -3 penalty for using an off-hand attack.

 

Anyway, this is clearly laid out in 5ER p73...

 

Also, Sweep doesn't restrict you to "the same weapon", only that they all be HTH attacks. 5ER 397 :-)

 

 

If the difference is a +2 to hit (after the first) and a maybe little better DCV (it seems to be a wash for anything less than a dex of 16) I do not see the advantage over over taking a few 3pt skill levels in combat. Am I missing something?

 

[SteelDoom]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

If the difference is a +2 to hit (after the first) and a maybe little better DCV (it seems to be a wash for anything less than a dex of 16) I do not see the advantage over over taking a few 3pt skill levels in combat. Am I missing something?

 

 

In a fantasy game, the GM could (I generally do) disallow sweep unless TWC is bought. In a super game, I've seen players with 17 dcv based on raw dex. Halving that is painful. I guess it is one of those things that is specific to the situation.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Two-handed fighting

 

I blame RA Salvator for this entire issue. He must be skewered.