View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
cheshire Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 04 Jan 2004 Posts: 4833
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2015 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been screaming for at least six or seven years now that dual wielding just can't be done well in SWD6. If you've playtested it for this long, then I think you're due a nearly decade-long overdue, "I was wrong."
But I do have one question, and I'm clearly misunderstanding something here. You say:
Quote: | n terms of melee defense - the "fire linked" also adds to the defensive roll for melee parry if both weapons are used to defend - but it counts as two actions as well. they may seem like a poor choice but trust me when I say that - that measly 1d addition has saved a couple of my pcs lives before. |
If you take two actions to defend with two (for example) swords, and you do nothing else that round, then it will be -1D for the MAP. However, your dual wielding gives you an additional +1D. It seems this would just cancel each other out. _________________ __________________________________
Before we take any of this too seriously, just remember that in the middle episode a little rubber puppet moves a spaceship with his mind. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3191
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I find that when it comes to damage, any increase in single damage rolls is better than rolling two separate damage rolls. Especially when the target is tough.
As for defense, I tend to think that the extra weapon enhances the user's ability to defend, and so a bonus to a single roll seems appropriate.
When it comes to attacks, I feel like the player ought to have the option to choose between twwo separate hits or a fire-linked effect.... I might have to try developing a house rule to express what Im talking about. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Teazia Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 10 Sep 2014 Posts: 54
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dual Welding is munchkinland. It broke AD&D 2e and is still a problem in D&D land. Better to leave it as cinematic flavor IMO. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tetsuoh Captain
Joined: 21 Jul 2010 Posts: 505
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cheshire wrote: | I've been screaming for at least six or seven years now that dual wielding just can't be done well in SWD6. If you've playtested it for this long, then I think you're due a nearly decade-long overdue, "I was wrong."
But I do have one question, and I'm clearly misunderstanding something here. You say:
Quote: | n terms of melee defense - the "fire linked" also adds to the defensive roll for melee parry if both weapons are used to defend - but it counts as two actions as well. they may seem like a poor choice but trust me when I say that - that measly 1d addition has saved a couple of my pcs lives before. |
If you take two actions to defend with two (for example) swords, and you do nothing else that round, then it will be -1D for the MAP. However, your dual wielding gives you an additional +1D. It seems this would just cancel each other out. |
Ah yes I forgot part. We allow this action to be used as if your map was not increased for that single action but then affects all other actions that round.
IE
Darth Gankyou declares 3 actions (-2) and attacks our buddy Charles
Charles states 2 actions (-1) his round and declares hes dropping a die to Double Parry.
Normally this would use both his actions (and mean he used two actions for no real benefit) but since he declared he's dropping a die in our game he gets his Parry roll at -1D and keeps his next action at -2D, as well as every action he takes from then on out that round.
Basically we just delay the MAP penalty a single pass on the round to make it worth doing.
Knew I was forgetting something.
Dual wielding in our game is worth doing but often means while you take the same amount of actions you generally achieve less or the same as everyone else.
Oh and because of our passes style of initiative - we do have people and npcs who act at the same time - leads to some interesting outcomes. We've had people shoot the same target at once - different targets as if in complete synch - kid you not - 4 guys picked each goon separate and had to write down their targets. And I even had a dual where the PC and the NPC shot each other dead. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dredwulf60 Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016 Posts: 910
|
Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's what I do for dual wield;
I have made a new class of skill that I call 'Limiter skills'.
So someone who has the melee skill can take the Dual wield skill. The dual wield skill cannot be used for anything on its own. It's sole purpose is to determine how many melee skill dice you are allowed to use.
Basically when dual-wielding by having to train in this extra skill, over and above what you normally have to do for the single weapon. If you get the dual wield skill higher then you're still only as good as the regular weapon skill until you improve it as well.
What this does it simulate the extra training that goes into dual wielding. A character who has melee skill of 4D and Dual wield melee of 3D can fight with one sword at 4D or with two swords at 3D.
In return for the expenditure you get the combat bonuses as described below...and the look cool factor while doing it.
Dual wield –Melee Weapon-(Dexterity)
This skill functions as a limiter. When using two weapons at once, use the lower die value between the weapon skill and the dual wield skill for attack and parry rolls.
Having a second weapon allows another attack roll to be made every action at the same multi action penalty,
or it allows half the dice (round down) to be added to the main skill dice for parries;
or the user can treat multiple opponents as if there were half as many (round down).
Dual Blaster Pistol (Dexterity)
This skill functions as a limiter. When using two weapons at once, use the lower die value between the weapon skill and the dual wield skill for attack rolls.
Having a second blaster allows another attack roll to be made every action with the same multiple action penalty. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14021 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | or the user can treat multiple opponents as if there were half as many (round down). |
By the RAW though, there is no penalty associated with having multiple opponents as is... So what was this supposed to offset? _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dredwulf60 Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016 Posts: 910
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
garhkal wrote: | Quote: | or the user can treat multiple opponents as if there were half as many (round down). |
By the RAW though, there is no penalty associated with having multiple opponents as is... So what was this supposed to offset? |
Another house rule I have...
Multiple opponents in close combat
When a single character is in a fight against multiple opponents, they must subtract 1D from all of their actions, per opponent past the first. The penalties never reduce the character to less than 1D. This counts for both melee and brawl fights as well as ranged combat fights that occur at point blank ranges.
Fighting 1 opponent: Normal attacks and defenses.
Fighting 2 opponents: -1D to all attacks and defenses
Fighting 3 opponents: -2D to all attacks and defenses.
Fighting 4 opponents: -3D to all attacks and defenses.
Fighting 5 opponents: -4D to all attacks and defenses
In this way a lone fighter can get swarmed unless they are VERY good or they are average and the attackers are VERY bad.
Also one of my Talents and Techniques 'Warriors Awareness' helps out in this regard. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16163 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is there a counter penalty for the attackers? I understand that, as the number of attackers increase, so to do the chances of them getting in each other's way, unless they are trained to operate as a group. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dredwulf60 Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016 Posts: 910
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
crmcneill wrote: | Is there a counter penalty for the attackers? I understand that, as the number of attackers increase, so to do the chances of them getting in each other's way, unless they are trained to operate as a group. |
That's a good point.
At this point the house rule exists primarily to make the PCs think twice about taking on a group of toughs by themselves.
It came about years ago during my Swoop Gangs of Tatooine game. The characters were all in their late teens. One or two PCs were pretty good brawlers. But when they walked into a cantina and a rival gang was there...and four of them stood up and started walking over...the PCs new they were in for a tough fight or they would start backing for the door.
Giving the larger group penalties was counter to the effect I wanted. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14021 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Mon Jan 11, 2016 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Looking at it, practically every other game system out there, only gives a penalty to the Singular attacker when faced with multiple opponents.
So while i could see a smaller sort of penalty for those massed attackers, i don't feel one is needed. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dredwulf60 Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016 Posts: 910
|
Posted: Mon Jan 11, 2016 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
garhkal wrote: | Looking at it, practically every other game system out there, only gives a penalty to the Singular attacker when faced with multiple opponents.
So while i could see a smaller sort of penalty for those massed attackers, i don't feel one is needed. |
Fair enough. You can't always watch your back when there are at least 2 opponents.
But when the odds are two to one, I think..okay I might be able to do this.
When I'm facing three guys, I really, REALLY want my backup.
Maybe when it's a larger group, they really can do a number on a lone someone because, as you say, they are trained. Maybe they are using the command-based group coordination. And if they aren't, they're just getting in each others way. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14021 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
True. In ADND for instance, you get penalized on your defense rating (AC) for flank attacks as well as rear attacks cause of not being able to see/defend against those people. BUT i have not actually seen anything wrote for SW to cover that issue. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16163 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe the penalty for the attackers starts later but ramps up faster. Such as:2 vs. 1 = -1D for defender, no penalty for attackers
3 vs. 1 = -2D for defender, -1D for attackers
4 vs. 1 = -3D for defender, -3D for attackers
5 vs. 1 = -4D for defender, -5D for attackers. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Whill Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Posts: 10286 Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
Posted: Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Not to be a naysayer or derail your house rules discussion/development, but I just thought someone should chime in just for completeness and say...
I don't see the need to be all crunchy about this. In my game, characters have Handedness that must be determined at character creation. The purpose of this is because I have an offhanded penalty (using the off hand for a one-handed action suffers a -1D penalty). This allows for a minimum level of realism that will prevent most characters from successfully duel-wielding weapons due to maps and the offhanded weapon. On the other hand, there is no special skill or ruleset needed for duel-wielding. And I do have an Ambidextrous advantage that can be purchased at char gen that will take care of the offhanded penalty in general, but either way a duel-wielder just needs a high enough skill to be effective at it.
And I know you guys may mostly be talking about melee but as far as range weapons, my cinematic duel-wielding idol Billy the Kid from Young Guns notably alternated firing his left and right pistols. So the Kid using two guns seems to mainly be a rate of fire thing. If Billy the Kid isn't shooting both pistols simultaneously, then I just don't see the need for my game to have any sort of special rules for duel-wielding. The offhand penalty and maps prevent everyone from duel-wielding, and that's good enough for me.
Just sayin' for the record. Please carry on. _________________ *
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14021 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2016 3:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
CRMcNeill wrote: | Maybe the penalty for the attackers starts later but ramps up faster. Such as:2 vs. 1 = -1D for defender, no penalty for attackers
3 vs. 1 = -2D for defender, -1D for attackers
4 vs. 1 = -3D for defender, -3D for attackers
5 vs. 1 = -4D for defender, -5D for attackers. |
Why ramp up faster? If anything i don't even see it equaling the defender's penalty.. Otherwise why bother ganging up on someone.
Also there really needs to be some sort of penalty period for flank or rear attacks.. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|