I never heard of Earthdawn and am looking for RPG material that uses multiple actions. I'll have to check that out.
[Combat] Fighting Styles
- Thread starter Chris_Nightwing
- Start date
I never heard of Earthdawn and am looking for RPG material that uses multiple actions. I'll have to check that out.
I'm all for it as long as the multiple actions are a part of an action economy that keeps all actions per turn to a maximum number per level. I think it will fit in nicely with the off-hand weapon rules that existed in previous editions.
I could see a character engaging in a windmill style attack at 20th level able to hit with a main weapon then an off-hand weapon the first foe, then swing around and hit again in the same fashion for a total of 4 attacks per turn.
The momentum of the game works best though if everyone is allowed only 1 reaction though. And it becomes really fun when the player has to interrupt the DM to take that reaction.
Example,
DM: The sneaky little Kobold tries to zip right under you to get at the old man with the little stick.
Player: I trip it! The player rolls quickly.
DM: The DM rolls! The Kobold falls flat on his face!
Player: It's my turn and I stomp the Kobold on his neck while throwing this dagger in his friend's eye. Then I shoot the old hag in the crotch with this handcrossbow of mine. Rolls.
DM: O.k. You said that very quickly. I'll allow that.
It adds a new level of fun and sophistication to the game. The Dodge Action for example is great as it is now effective. But I think that we have to be very careful about how many actions per turn a character can have. We also have to be careful to normalize the damage to 1[w] per attack with many actions per turn. The game becomes too lethal for characters otherwise.
Another possible way to look at it would be to use the Multiple Die roll mechanic as a benefit of a form of "Specialization".
Examples:
Two-Weapon Fighting: When making an Attack Action of this type...
* Roll your attack twice and choose the best result
* Gain either a +1 bonus to AC OR +1 bonus to the attack rolls.
Two-Handed: When making an Attack Action of this type...
* Roll your damage twice and choose the best result
* Gain a +2 bonus to these damage rolls.
Sword and Board:
* Roll your attack twice and choose the best result
* Gain a +1 bonus to AC from your Shield.
Etc.
Examples:
Two-Weapon Fighting: When making an Attack Action of this type...
* Roll your attack twice and choose the best result
* Gain either a +1 bonus to AC OR +1 bonus to the attack rolls.
Two-Handed: When making an Attack Action of this type...
* Roll your damage twice and choose the best result
* Gain a +2 bonus to these damage rolls.
Sword and Board:
* Roll your attack twice and choose the best result
* Gain a +1 bonus to AC from your Shield.
Etc.
Stormonu
Legend
Sorry, not this ever. I don't care if the player can talk as fast as the micro machines guy, unless his character has multiple action s available, this isn't going to fly at my table.
Crazy Jerome
First Post
One desperately in need of becoming Holy BBQ.
It's never had any basis in reality but "gamers made up something that sounded right based on total misconception of how two weapons work". It doesn't even have the excuse of a lot of early D&D mechanics that otherwise get called nonsensical, but were based on a clear intention to abstract something more complex. A second attack is something specific, and fits D&D about as well as a called shot does--not at all. This is especially true given what even the six second round represents, as Ranger Wicket explained.A better bonus for two weapons is a modest bonus to hit. Perhaps you can trade that bonus to hit for a bonus to defense (melee attacks only)?
In fact, that could solve the whole problem of a shield not being treated as a weapon, too. Set it up so that if you go aggressive with Sword & Board (i.e. bash with the shield) you get a bonus to hit at the expense of losing your shield bonus to AC. Set the numbers so that two weapons is slightly better on offense but can be traded for defense while S&B is the other way.
Given that D&D has always made the distinction between "hits" and "effective hits," it also wouldn't hurt in Next to swap all or part of the bonus to hit as a bonus to damage, depending on what the rest of the system needs to work--though this is of course even more abstact.
Then obviously 2-handed weapons get a very modest bonus to hit, too, which equally might be efficiently swapped for extra damage.
That leaves single-weapon/empty hand and complete empty hand. From a weaponry persective, these are distinctly sub optimal, which is why swashbuckling and the like are going to go for a second weapon or buckler whenever they can. To make these styles meaningful, you need:
- Useful things for that spare hand to do in combat that don't directly involve attack or defense.
- Special techniques learned by the character to make up for the sub optimal nature of the weaponry.
Grabs would be one thing that the rules traditionally have not done very well that could use a free hand.
There is a lot of talk about how a Fighter cannot stop someone moving past him, well if he grabs hold of his opponent with his off-hand stopping them moving is going to become a lot easier. I seem to recall 4th had some basic rules for this, I might have some NPCs try it in my next playtest.
Crazy Jerome
First Post
Or broaden that to be both movement enhancing for himself as well as movement denying for the opponents. You can't swing on a rope without a free hand, you certainly can't attack while swinging on a rope unless your weapon is one-handed.
Given the same framework I layed out for the rest of the styles, you could make the above the main thing, then allow some trades for defense. Really, the main advantage of using one hand is that you are not nearly as constrained on posture, and are putting a lot less of yourself in harms way when you move in.
Edit: No doubt someone is operating out there with the assumption that a normal fencing style is more constrained instead of less, not taking into account that the constraints of the fencing style are to maximize defense--not required for the weapon work itself.
Last edited:
Li Shenron
Legend
Whatever the designers come up with, I sincerely hope that they would consult some serious martial arts experts on the topic...
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.
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.
Crazy Jerome
First Post
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.
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.)
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
First Post
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
Legend
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
First Post
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
First Post
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.
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.
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
Legend
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
Legend
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.
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.
