[Combat] Fighting Styles

[RangerWickett]

How about: "You can make two attack rolls -- one for each weapon -- and keep the better of the two."

So basically you come at your opponent from two angles, and whichever one is less well-defended is where you put your oomph.

 

[I'm A Banana]

You are missing one crucial factor:

It is a lot of fun to hit things with multiple attacks.

I say this as a man who is playing a thri-kreen monk/ranger in 4e with minor-action attacks and free-action damage and a quick weapon and who gets 4 + melee attacks (one for each arm, and few for the bites and the legs, too!) in the right circumstances.

It is a lot of fun. Whap. Whap-whap-whap. Whappitty-whap-whap-whap-whap.

Thus, within reason, it is something that I think we WANT. Making sense or no. Two attacks don't break the game (or shouldn't, anyway).

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

How about: "You can make two attack rolls -- one for each weapon -- and keep the better of the two."

So basically you come at your opponent from two angles, and whichever one is less well-defended is where you put your oomph.

This is advantage - and if you don't call it that, it's weird, but if you do call it that, it's Rogue paradise. It's a tricky conundrum what to do with TWF if not an extra attack.

 

[BobTheNob]

How about: "You can make two attack rolls -- one for each weapon -- and keep the better of the two."

So basically you come at your opponent from two angles, and whichever one is less well-defended is where you put your oomph.

This is an interesting approach. If you have 2 different weapons (and Im talking very different, say a life drainer and a flaming), you get two chances to attack. If BOTH hit you can roll damage, then pick which one actually hits. Versatility without overmuch power.

It leaves 2 handed open to take the role of best DPR.

Im completely over the extra attack approach to two-handed. It proven impossible to balance and harder in my mind to justify (relative to your earlier posts). To me, two weapon fighting isnt about turning a character into a meat-blender, its about characters having a way to "find gaps" in an enemies defences. I like this approach as it neatly models that.

 

[Zaphling]

The OP forgot some other fighting styles, maybe.

Crossbowman
It's different from an archer since this can be utilized in tight places like caves or similar. And reloading a crossbow takes too much time.

Mounted Combat
Not a fan. But it is another combat style.

 

[Stormonu]

The OP forgot some other fighting styles, maybe.

Crossbowman
It's different from an archer since this can be utilized in tight places like caves or similar. And reloading a crossbow takes too much time.

Mounted Combat
Not a fan. But it is another combat style.

Don't forget hurled weapons as well. Unlike archery where you've got a quiver full of arrows, hurling a spear, javelin or axe tends to leave you weaponless afterward, unless we want to get into Gauntlet silliness with endless throwing weapons or making every magic ranged weapon auto-return (no thanks).

Also, unarmed kombat - "boxing type" vs. wrassling concerns should be hammered out sometime during the playtest.

 

[Minigiant]

Attacking with Two handed Greataxe: 1d12 + STR damage
Attacking with Longsword with both hands: 1d8 + STR +1 damage
Attacking with Longsword and while holding Shield: 1d8+ STR damage, +2 AC
Attacking with Longsword and Dagger: 1d8 + 1d4 + STR/DEX damage
Attacking with Longsword and Shield: 1d8 + STR +2 damage


There.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

And:

Polearm/Reach Fighter
Improvised Weapon Fighter
Double weapon fighter
Dire flail specialist ...

 

[Tony Vargas]

I don't think that anything as generic as TWFing or S&B or the like should consume a whole Theme. The mix of weapons you use is something that could reasonably vary based on what you're doing. You don't hunt grouse with a broadsword or stand in a phalanx with a rapier & main gauche or keep a two-handed-sword in-hand as you crawl through 3' high tunnels. If fighters are to have any hint of the flexibility they need to keep up with the challenges of adventuring (and the ever-growing selection of spells casters have to obviate those challenges), they'll at least need the flexibility to change weapons, and tying the huge chunk of character-definition and character ability that a Theme represents to one very generic 'style' blows that.

It also means a weapon-oriented character will face a stark choice between being truely effective with whatever style he favors and being customized, at all.


A 'Style' might make sense as a theme if it carries a lot more with it than just what you hold in your hands in a fight. It should have some out-of-combat implications, for one thing, since the fighter, in particular, is in desperate need of those. It should cover several different weapon mixes for different circumstances appropriate to it, as well. For instance, a "Knight" or "Cavalier" theme might include all of the following: Skill in courtly graces, knowledge of military and political history, bonuses for leading men in combat, knowledge of engineering and siegework, hunting including falconry, horsemanship and mounted combat. In addition to mounted combat with the lance in a joust, and lance and other weapons as part of a unit in open war, the Knight should be adept at fighting afoot in a duel or vs many opponents, using weapon & shield or a greatsword or even a weapon like the Bec de Corbin, and should be well-able to defend himself with just a longsword or quarterstaff when not in full harness for battle. Since it's a fantasy world, having specific abilities of use in facing giants, dragons, and the like would also not be unreasonable.

 

[jadrax]

It should have some out-of-combat implications, for one thing, since the fighter, in particular, is in desperate need of those.

Themes are purely collections of combat powers.

For instance, a "Knight" or "Cavalier" theme might include all of the following: Skill in courtly graces, knowledge of military and political history, bonuses for leading men in combat, knowledge of engineering and siegework, hunting including falconry, horsemanship and mounted combat.

This all to be skills, which are covered by the Background option.

In addition to mounted combat with the lance in a joust, and lance and other weapons as part of a unit in open war, the Knight should be adept at fighting afoot in a duel or vs many opponents, using weapon & shield or a greatsword or even a weapon like the Bec de Corbin, and should be well-able to defend himself with just a longsword or quarterstaff when not in full harness for battle.

This all sounds like Fighter Class Abilities to me.

Since it's a fantasy world, having specific abilities of use in facing giants, dragons, and the like would also not be unreasonable.

I think these could be covered via Themes, although sounds a bit like the Ranger's traditional shtick.