Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SBMC" data-source="post: 2493055" data-attributes="member: 30040">Defend.net hmmm - did you use the same arguments and did anyone pick up some historybooks?Your statements are true - but exactly what here points to TWF being superior to other forms of fighting?Really? Are you sure about that? The draw has nothing to do with it then?Really? And exactly to what extent did two weapon fighting incorporate itself into the general martial arts of China? And I am not talking about the monks who trained from 3 years old; the common soldiers and the like.Wrong - armor is the point. With Armor strikes must be either more powerful or placed with great skill and precision. Someone wearing armor can expose areas to be attacked whilst defending others and attacking. If a TWF fighter wears armor; his mobility is reduced - if he wields a weapon in one hand (especially the offhand) his power is reduced. With a single weapon in hand there is less power; period. In addition a weapon used in defense is less able to be used in defense as a shield is. Your points argue that in reality a two weapon fighter can out due a fighter with a sword and shield. You also argue here that the weapons used were comparable; long sword and dagger for example NOT two daggers or the equivalent of short swords.Really? And exactly who are you sparring with? Did the opponent also have armor? The wound you would have made - disabling or lethal? Or did you just get around the shield to make a light poke at the chest (that would have a breast plate there normally)? I would love to see you in an SCA tournament. So you are saying that every Filipino warrior that was produced was an expert TWF that could overcome anyone with a shield or any another type of weapon/defense system? Or is this like the Five Rings example where you pull out the exception instead of the rule? Are you saying that that is all that they trained with? Did they not also train with swords wielded in two hands? Are you saying that the value of power in strikes is not mentioned in kali? And, also bringing in the above - are you saying all Filipino warriors wore armor? During all time periods?And again and as mentioned in a previous post; the culture went towards TWF as one method of training that was wide spread - for one reason or another - that does not mean that it was more effective than others. If it was then the rest of the world would have adopted in wholeheartedly - the did not.It was also because making plate armor was not perfected until much later in human history (I forget the actual dates - so I won't quote them at the moment) and that plate armor was great in certain situations; such as fighting another guy with plate or on horseback. Shields are also very effective on a battlefield where the enemy can come from anywhere; fighting one on one is another story altogether.Yes - the shield became redundant when full plate came out - for those that wore full plate that is. But that is common knowledge.Again you say it again - really? Read above. If that were so then why does the majority of the world not partake in TWF? First - if you wanted your question answered in a straight forward manner you picked the wrong place to post! This is a forum mind you where every thread can go anywhere and if a post you better have a thick skin.. The entire point is that they would not - yo are giving +2's and +3's to AC; if you make that hard to get that is one thing but as freebies… A feat as I had posted before:Example (these may already exist someplace in one form or another):Two Weapon Blocking: Prereq: TWF, TWD, There should be at least on more - what ???You may use your offhand attack (provided you have not already used it during the round) to attempt to block an attack by a melee weapon that has hit you. Make an attack role; if it beats the attack roll your opponent made to hit you the attack is blocked (and one of your offhand attacks has been used up). If the opponent made a critical hit and it is confirmed via the second dice roll it cannot be blocked in this manner.Extra Note: Perhaps also allow an improved version that lets them burn AoO's in the same way - with a limit per round.Another feat:Two Weapon Combat Expertise: Prereq: TWF, Combat ExpertiseOn your turn, you may opt to deduct up to 5 points of your BAB and use it as a shield bonus applied to your offhand weapon. The amount deducted from you BAB is doubled when applied to your offhand attacks - If you take a 5 point penalty on your BAB using this feat then our offhand takes a -10 penalty. This effect remains until you next turn. This effect stacks with the Combat Expertise Feat. If you are no longer holding you offhand weapon (dropped it, disarmed, etc.) for any reason you loose the benefit immediately. You may make no more than a single attack with your offhand weapon while using this feat. ---------------------------------------------------------------In the Complete Warrior there are plenty of other TWF feats (and in other books as well) such as "Pin Shield" and the like. There are also "style" feats in Complete Warrior that allow you to do other thing dependant upon your weapon choices.Perhaps here; Two Weapon Combat Expertise could be a prereq for Two Weapon Blocking.Feats exist for this purpose and why there are so darn many of them; to allow characters to do amazing things. However your ideas are "freebies" that add to existing feats with no cost at all to the character - in your game world everyone who swings a sword would be stupid not to swing two of them seeing as a get a +2 right of the bat to AC plus the TWD feats...plus the Dex Bonuses that come with the high Dex required to get TWF feats...</blockquote>

Verification