[Combat] Fighting Styles

[Crazy Jerome]

For example, I have absolutely no idea if fighting with 2 weapons should really improve your damage output, your defence, or your speed of attacks... all I know is that if I try to pick up e.g. two sticks and pretend they are swords, I have an unbelievable difficult time using both of them simultaneously (I am not a natural ambidextrous), so for a normal (I guess...) person like me TFW is actually a penalty because I have no training in it, and the feeling I get is that training would be very hard.

The biggest issue with the second weapon in my experience is the grip--and more specifically, all the little tricks that you play with your grip for subtle movements. Though perhaps my modest, partial ambidexterity accounts for this. (I can bat equally well left-handed, shave left handed, can use a hammer left-handed almost as well as with my right hand, play piano, type, etc ... but can't write with my left hand at all.)

That said, I don't think there are many weapon issues that would not be rapidly overcome with training. (Certainly any "fighter" would have far more training than would be required, in general.) All kinds of people learn to use both hands at once in complex tasks. It's the integration of the two together during the training that makes this happen. Just like you have people that can't chew bubblegum and walk at the same time, most everyone has some kind of coordination issue somewhere.

 

[DEFCON 1]

In terms of the idea for Two Weapon Fighting of making 2 attack rolls and taking the best result (but not actually calling it Advantage)... I think a better idea for TWF (so its not as powerful) would instead be to make one attack roll and only if the attack misses, can you make a second attack roll (to represent the other weapon).

This serves two purposes. One, it solves the problem of rolling two dice like you had Advantage without calling it Advantage so that the rogue doesn't get overpowered (it's an entirely different "two attack roll" style of die rolling), and... two, you avoid the larger number of Natural 20 rolls that you get when rolling Advantage. Rolling twice and taking the best gives you more chances to get the 20, whereas only re-rolling misses cuts down on the total number of rolls that are made.

This mechanic is good... it's just not as good as Advantage (since I don't think it should be.)

 

[Crazy Jerome]

In terms of the idea for Two Weapon Fighting of making 2 attack rolls and taking the best result (but not actually calling it Advantage)... I think a better idea for TWF (so its not as powerful) would instead be to make one attack roll and only if the attack misses, can you make a second attack roll (to represent the other weapon).

That's a reasonable way of showing greater accuracy due to the two weapons. Can't XP you yet.

Would be interesting to see if a similar mechanic for defense could be applied reasonably to a second weapons or shield. If you have a shield or off-hand weapon and get hit, you can force a second roll. Limit it to one so-called "block" per round, not unlock the Guardian power. Then obviously off-hand weapons only get this versus melee attacks, while shields get it versus everything.

If on your round, you miss with your attack, and elect to use the option to reroll (whether for a weapon attack or shield bash), that counts as your one second roll, and thus you have no extra defensive options that round.

Then allow any magic bonus on the shield (or off-hand weapon, too, I guess) to work here, instead of on AC all the time. This means that a +3 heavy shield gives you some general protectiion (+2 AC all the time), and then once per round gives you a shot at blocking some nasty attack with an AC +3 over normal (including the already embedded +2 from having a shield.) That would make a Sword & Board character feel very different.

 

[Li Shenron]

In terms of the idea for Two Weapon Fighting of making 2 attack rolls and taking the best result (but not actually calling it Advantage)... I think a better idea for TWF (so its not as powerful) would instead be to make one attack roll and only if the attack misses, can you make a second attack roll (to represent the other weapon).

This serves two purposes. One, it solves the problem of rolling two dice like you had Advantage without calling it Advantage so that the rogue doesn't get overpowered (it's an entirely different "two attack roll" style of die rolling), and... two, you avoid the larger number of Natural 20 rolls that you get when rolling Advantage. Rolling twice and taking the best gives you more chances to get the 20, whereas only re-rolling misses cuts down on the total number of rolls that are made.

This mechanic is good... it's just not as good as Advantage (since I don't think it should be.)

Not to mention the fact that if TWF simply grants you advantage all the time, then no other favorable condition actually gives you any benefit at all. You have little reasons left for playing smart/tactically in a fight.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

BTW, as a passing comment on the above, one of the fighter players in our playtest last weekend remarked that the Guardian power on the dwarf cleric was like having a "pre-emptive, cure light wounds, every round that the cleric could get into a good position to use it." More than anything, that is what distinguished the cleric from the fighters.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I think that in 5e they're getting rid of a lot of the "feats to reduce penalties" in favor of "use whatever weapon combo you want, but take feats to add flavor."

That is, any fighter (or rogue, or ranger, or paladin...) can pick up two swords and fight effectively, just like they can pick up a sword and shield or a crossbow without taking 7 feats first.

Ideally, I think there would be themes that complement certain weapon choices, like the Guardian theme; but like the Guardian theme, they shouldn't be necessary for the style to function.

I think in the case of TWF, this means they'll find a way for it to be balanced with no feats, and then offer themes to spice it up. I'm thinking maybe one attack with each hand, but both at a -3 penalty, would work well as a starting value.

 

[HeinorNY]

Whatever the designers come up with, I sincerely hope that they would consult some serious martial arts experts on the topic...

The problem is that guys from organizations like ARMA have no idea how to apply renaissance martial arts against monsters, magical creatures and all sort of fantasy denizens etc.

Whatever the advantage of fighting with two swords against another human in a duel is, I'm pretty sure it won't be true if the same Fighter faces a monster that attacks with 4 giant claws.

A fantasy 'medieval' martial art - that 'naturally' evolved in a fantasy world filled with monsters and magic, where its users, the Fighters, had to adapt their techniques against all sorts of surreal opponents - would be so alien to our European martial arts that I'm much more comfortable in letting melee combat concepts as abstract and fantastic as possible.
I'd consult Troy, LOTR and Wrath of Titans for inspiration any day over thearma.org site

 

[Li Shenron]

The problem is that guys from organizations like ARMA have no idea how to apply renaissance martial arts against monsters, magical creatures and all sort of fantasy denizens etc.

I think this is a non-issue, since they are fantasy. If 2WF is modelled somewhat realistically against man-vs-man then everything is fine.

 

[Tony Vargas]

On the TWF thing, here's a purely mechanical thought: (I mean, a thought purely about mechanics):

The big problem with two attack rolls isn't that you have a better chance to hit, or do an extra weapon die, it's that you double-up on all kinds of damage bonuses (and with no attack, ac, or save scaling to speak of, advancement in 5e is going mean some big damage bonuses). In fact, in 5e, the better chance to hit of two attacks is no different than with having Advantage.

So, here it goes:

When you attack with two weapons, you roll two dice to attack. If you have advantage or disadvantage, you still roll only two dice.

Normally, you pick one die to represent your primary weapon and one for your secondary.

If you hit with either die, you score a normal hit with that weapon.
If you crit with either die, you score a crit with that weapon.
If you hit with both, you score a special hit that does damage equal to the weapon die of the primary, plus the weapon die of the secondary weapon, plus your usual modifiers (once). IF both hit and either or both crit, the corresponding weapon die is maximized.

If you have advantage while attacking with two weapons:

If you hit with either die, you score a hit with the weapon of your choice.
If you crit with either die, you score a crit with the weapon of your choice.
If you hit with both, you score the same special hit as above. If either or both of the dice are crits, the whole special hit damage is maximized.

If you have disadvantage:

If you miss with either die, you miss.
If you hit with both dice, you hit with the weapon that rolled the highest natural number on it's die - if they tie, you hit with a weapon of your choice. If either of those dice is a crit, you score a special hit, as above. If both are crits, you score maximum damage on the special hit.


I know that seems complicated, but it's really just meshing it with advantage/disadvantage that makes it so. The basic idea is: you roll to hit with each weapon, and roll damage with the weapon die of each weapon that hit, and add modifiers only /once/.



A much simpler alternative is to simply roll to hit once, and add the damage dice of the two weapons together, adding modifiers only once. This would make using two weapons mechanically /very/ similar to using a two-handed weapon.