The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Two-weapon Fighting
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules -> Two-weapon Fighting Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
MrNexx
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 1263
Location: Houston

PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:33 am    Post subject: Two-weapon Fighting Reply with quote

Were there ever official rules for two-weapon fighting?
_________________
"I’m telling you, you’ll never have a deeper sleep than curled up in a Wookie’s lap."
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Error
Captain
Captain


Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 680
Location: Any blackberry patch.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm sure there is someone who can direct you to the specific page. In the meantime, I'd guess something like this:

My first thought would be that you'd get -1D to blaster for each shot you make in a round, regardless of if you're holding two blasters or one. It doesn't seem very advantageous.

However, you could always write some rules that give two-weapon shooters some kind of small bonus, enough to make it worth it.

On a Mythbusters episode a while ago, different types of shooting guys (as in movies) was investigating. The styles included holding a pistol sideways, dual wielding, shooting from the hip, holding the gun with one hand away from the body, etc. Their findings were that the single-weapon user who holds his or her weapon correctly were the most accurate. Dual-wielding didn't seem to confer any advantage at all; in fact I believe it was nearer the bottom of the list than the top.

Then again, I bet there are indeed RAW for this. Particularly since Anakin battling Dooku in Episdoe II...he has two lightsabers for a few seconds before he gets his hand cut off.

It might be cool to alter the rules so that dual wielding does get a decent bonus. It's a lot cooler to imagine, IMO.
_________________
The only words of explanation you need for any concept in the entire Star Wars universe are the words Science Fiction and Space Opera.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12019
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Officially i have never seen anything. Unofficially there's several benefits i have seen offered up.
One is you can make 2 shots (one with each hand) at the SAME TIME (action resolution phase) unlike before where you shoot once, someone else acts, then you shoot again.
Also certain blasters DO have fire rates of 1, 2 (or the like) so having two pistols in hand allows you to shoot more than what you normally could have.
_________________
Confuscious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrNexx
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 1263
Location: Houston

PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For the record, I'm not a huge fan of dual-wielding; most systems tend to highly overvalue it, while undervaluing a shield. But I was reading the recent Star Wars comic, and Darth Vader was briefly dual-wielding his own lightsaber and Anakin's (which he'd taken from Luke), and the thought wandered across my mind.
_________________
"I’m telling you, you’ll never have a deeper sleep than curled up in a Wookie’s lap."
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrNexx
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 1263
Location: Houston

PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, my preliminary rules, partially based on the rules for fire-linking, and my favorite rules for two-weapon fighting:

Each additional weapon wielded: Each additional weapon wielded counts as an action, but also part of a combined action; while they subtract 1D due to MAP, they also add +1 due to combined actions; only a single attack roll is made (using the lower number of dice, if two skills are applicable). If the attack is successful, roll damage for both weapons (including the wild die for each weapon), and use the better of the two damages.

So, Amy the Jedi is using two lightsabers, but is not using lightsaber combat. Usually, she rolls 6D on lightsaber attacks; because she is using two lightsabers, she rolls 5D+1. If she hits, she will roll 5D damage, twice, taking the better of the two.

She is fighting Bob the Besalisk, who is using two vibro-axes and two knives. His Melee Combat skill is 6D, but, since he is using three extra weapons, he rolls 6D -3D in MAPS, +1D+1 for combined actions, for a total of 4D+1. Because he has a 3D strength, when he rolls damage, he will roll 6D+1, 6D+1, 4D, and 4D, taking the best total of those 4... it might be that he winds up doing damage with one of his knives, because both his axes rolled poorly in damage.
_________________
"I’m telling you, you’ll never have a deeper sleep than curled up in a Wookie’s lap."
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cheshire
Arbiter-General (Moderator)


Joined: 04 Jan 2004
Posts: 4401

PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh man, I've seen this question come up so many times over the years. I've seen half a dozen means of trying to introduce it mechanically, and I've tested a fair few of them. Heck, I've done enough work in historical swordsmanship that I can talk with you about the real world benefits and liabilities (read as "why you don't see it too much in history" and how that might transition to game mechanics. But usually they wind up falling short.

However, someone a couple of years ago brought up a great idea, similar to garkhal's idea. What the suggestion was involved initiative order. Basically for a -2 to each action (and standard MAPs), you could take two actions on your initiative order, instead of going around the circle for everyone's first action, and then waiting to perform your second.

It has a modest penalty and modest benefit. Seems pretty reasonable to me, though I've never playtested it.
_________________
__________________________________
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.


Last edited by cheshire on Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Error
Captain
Captain


Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 680
Location: Any blackberry patch.

PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We can make some assumptions:

- Aiming two weapons simultaneously is harder than aiming one
- Pulling two triggers at the same time constitute two actions
- Since it will matter whether your target gets hit by one or both blasters, you will need to make a Blasters roll for each weapon
- If the target is hit by one, he take that much damage; if he is hit by two he should take that much damage.

Charles the smuggler has two blaster pistols (5D) and a blaster Skill of 5D+2. He says that this round he is going to shoot at Jenny with both blasters, who has a dodge of 5D.

Since Charles is doing two things this round, his Blaster goes down to 4D+2. Amy has declared her intention to dodge and rolls 18. Charle's first roll is 17 and his second roll is 23. The first shot misses and the second hits; damage is rolled, etc.

This makes more sense to me than someone getting any kind of bonus for using two weapons at the same time.
_________________
The only words of explanation you need for any concept in the entire Star Wars universe are the words Science Fiction and Space Opera.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12019
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 12:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

But would charle's two to hit rolls come at the same time??
_________________
Confuscious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5216
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 9:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrNexx wrote:
For the record, I'm not a huge fan of dual-wielding; most systems tend to highly overvalue it, while undervaluing a shield.

What RAW and all these house rules don't take into consideration is handedness. Most people aren't ambidextrous in our world, and I don't see how it would be any different in the SWU.

In my game, characters must choose a handedness (right or left) and record that on the character sheet. The other is the offhand. Multi-armed species still choose one hand as the dominant hand and the rest are all offhands. If using an offhand for anything, you suffer a -1D penalty. Ambidexterity is an advantage that must be purchased at char gen, but the only benefit that provides is offsetting the offhand penalty. (Multi-arm species just get one additional handedness, and the other hands are still off hands.) Nothing too crunchy. It's simple and fair.

Personally I don't see the need for special mechanics for two-handed fighting working differently than it would under RAW (with my Handedness above), but I would think that any rules for two-handed fighting should consider handedness and ambidexterity. If that's not a factor then you would think we would see it a lot, but we don't. Even Anakin's use of two lightsabers at the Battle of Geonosis literally lasted only a few seconds.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Error
Captain
Captain


Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 680
Location: Any blackberry patch.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the question comes down to "Does two-handed shooting confer an advantage over one-handed shooting, or does it incur a penalty."

My mind is of the latter. Two-handed melee fighting makes a bit more sense to me, but still would not attract any kind of huge advantage.

A lot of folks want rules for dual wielding that make it somehow better than single wielding. My opinion is that these folks think it looks cool (and it does).

Now, this isn't to say that there can't be situations where two or more hands do confer an advantage. But as the poster above me noted, ambidexterity is something you buy at character creation, and being ambidextrous alone just increases off-hand rolls by 1D, but that's hardly a reason to use two weapons.

Plus, what's wrong with simply firing your blaster twice in a round? There's nothing stopping you really.

If a species is super fast, and can do multiple actions in a round with no penalty, maybe I could see something there...
_________________
The only words of explanation you need for any concept in the entire Star Wars universe are the words Science Fiction and Space Opera.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12019
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Error wrote:

Plus, what's wrong with simply firing your blaster twice in a round? There's nothing stopping you really.\.


Damn near EVERY hold out pistol except the Jer0N-Be milad microwave stunner, the SCzerka 411 hold out, and the Palm blaster, have a fire rate of only 1 shot a round. And that's not even going into the sporting blaster pistols, regular blaster pistols or heavy ones... Or the rifles/carbines..

So if you held one of those pistols and needed to shoot twice, you would be SoL unless you two-gun wielded.[/i]
_________________
Confuscious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2419

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 6:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ill have to disagree with Whill on the handedness. The off hand can be trained to be profocient at a specific task. It just takes training/practice.

Boxers, for example, can train to fight left or right handed, and they rely on both hands to fight. While its true that handedness affects which "side" the boxer favors, it also comes down to training. Try standing in a fighting stance and throw a jab with you support side hand. It feels natural. Now switch the stance. The jab with the strong hand feels relatively awkward.

Likewise, in combat marksmanship, we train to operate the weapon with each hand. It doesn't male you ambidextrous, but with enough training, there is no loss of performance when shooting off hand. The point is thatt each hand has a role to play in the task, and learning to do the opposite role takes training.

As an example when I first learned to use a fork and knife to cut meat I held the knife in my rigjt hand, and them switched when I was done cutting. I thoight it was stupid to switch hands, so I just started cutting with my left hand. Was awkward at first, but now its perfectly natural, and cutting right handed is what feels strange.

Muscle memory is what really matters.

As for Anakin vs Dooku, Id argue that Dooku was a much bigger factor in Anakin's short-lived flurry than the idea that dual wielding isn't advantageous.

Also consider Miamoto Musashi. He endorsed the two-weapon fighting as superior to single sword fighting.

When it comes to shooting, the two-weapon shooter would most likely have to rely on "reflexive" or intuitive shooting. There are people who can do this. Bob Munden, for example.

Jerry Miculek is another shooter whom I believe has demonstrated that shooting with two weapons is possible with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

Having said all that, I am of the opinion that in the vast majority of scenarios, holding a single pistol with a two-handed grip is the most effective and practical way to run a pistol.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2419

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As for a house rule for how to handle two-weapon fighting, I would want the rule to require a cost to the character using it (a CP cost, for example). Once paid, Id want the character to be able to make two attacks more effectively than a character using one weapon.

A simpler solution, though, might be to allow re-rolls of one of your atack rolls each round (for example, re-roll x number of dice..perhaps the attribute portion of the dice). Rather than making two separate attack rolls.

Another option would be to roll once with a MAP, and if you hit with a margin of 0-5, roll the weapon's normal damage. If you hit with a margin greater than 5, then you get a +1D or +2D damage bonus, etc...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5216
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
Ill have to disagree with Whill on the handedness.

I don't disagree with you as far as the real world. I obviously do disagree with you on some aspect of how to manage the cinematic roleplaying game system that simulates the cinematic reality of the Star Wars films for the sake of creating original stories set in that fictional universe. With your reply starting out with this sentence and then going into to a lengthy list of real world examples, I feel you are are unfairly misrepresenting my view. I was not at all suggesting there is any inability to learn offhanded proficiency for specific tasks performed by Earth humans in the real world. Incorporating that level of detail makes more sense for a realistic modern game. For a cinematic adventure game as this one, I do feel that the simple offhanded penalty with universal ambidexterity available for characters is good enough to deal with handedness without getting overly crunchy. In my game, if a character without ambidexterity wants to get very proficient at a specific task with their offhand, they simply keep raising the skill for that task. With my offhand penalty only being -1D, the offhand proficiency keeps getting better as the skill does, only being 1D behind the dominant hand. (You have to admit that bringing handedness into my game at all is one small step better than RAW.) No, my game doesn't have a way to become completely equally proficient with the offhand only for a certain skill, but it's not because I don't feel that's possible in the real world. It's only because I don't feel that is necessary in the game.

Naaman wrote:
The off hand can be trained to be profocient at a specific task. It just takes training/practice.

Boxers, for example, can train to fight left or right handed, and they rely on both hands to fight. While its true that handedness affects which "side" the boxer favors, it also comes down to training. Try standing in a fighting stance and throw a jab with you support side hand. It feels natural. Now switch the stance. The jab with the strong hand feels relatively awkward.

Likewise, in combat marksmanship, we train to operate the weapon with each hand. It doesn't male you ambidextrous, but with enough training, there is no loss of performance when shooting off hand. The point is thatt each hand has a role to play in the task, and learning to do the opposite role takes training.

As an example when I first learned to use a fork and knife to cut meat I held the knife in my rigjt hand, and them switched when I was done cutting. I thoight it was stupid to switch hands, so I just started cutting with my left hand. Was awkward at first, but now its perfectly natural, and cutting right handed is what feels strange.

Muscle memory is what really matters.

<snip single Star Wars reference>

Also consider Miamoto Musashi. He endorsed the two-weapon fighting as superior to single sword fighting.

When it comes to shooting, the two-weapon shooter would most likely have to rely on "reflexive" or intuitive shooting. There are people who can do this. Bob Munden, for example.

Jerry Miculek is another shooter whom I believe has demonstrated that shooting with two weapons is possible with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

I find it quite humorous that you inserted a quick sentence about Anakin and Dooku in the middle of all that real world stuff. You must have the most realistic Star Wars game ever. But hey, whatever works for your game.

Naaman wrote:
As for Anakin vs Dooku, Id argue that Dooku was a much bigger factor in Anakin's short-lived flurry than the idea that dual wielding isn't advantageous.

I don't disagree. My point by replying to someone else's comment about Anakin vs Dooku wasn't meant to argue against dual wielding being advantageous. I meant that Anakin vs Dooku was a very brief single occurrence and ambidexterity is rare, so I was suggesting that some basic level of handedness should be considered for dual wielding or else we would see it a lot more in the movies.

Naaman wrote:
Having said all that, I am of the opinion that in the vast majority of scenarios, holding a single pistol with a two-handed grip is the most effective and practical way to run a pistol.

I'll have to agree with Naaman on this.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12019
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 1:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
As for a house rule for how to handle two-weapon fighting, I would want the rule to require a cost to the character using it (a CP cost, for example). Once paid, Id want the character to be able to make two attacks more effectively than a character using one weapon.

A simpler solution, though, might be to allow re-rolls of one of your atack rolls each round (for example, re-roll x number of dice..perhaps the attribute portion of the dice). Rather than making two separate attack rolls.

Another option would be to roll once with a MAP, and if you hit with a margin of 0-5, roll the weapon's normal damage. If you hit with a margin greater than 5, then you get a +1D or +2D damage bonus, etc...


How's about
"Two weapon fighting" - 15cp cost.
This merit (special ability??) allows characters who purchase it from then on, to fight in either melee, or distance (pick blaster, firearms, missile weapons etc per Purchase of the ability) with one weapon in each hand. If they split targets, they only take a -1 pip Multiple action penalty instead of the normal -1d, and get to roll for BOTH attacks during the same action phase. If either hit, roll damage as normal vs that person.
If putting both attacks on the same target, the MAP is the same -1 pip, but if EITHER attack roll hits, the damage is +1d over the weapon's damage.
_________________
Confuscious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 1 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0