Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wolfwood2" data-source="post: 4208482" data-attributes="member: 39394">My opinions:On two weapon fighting: I approve of the idea that holding a weapon in each hand does not get you an extra attack per round.&nbsp; An &quot;attack&quot; is just an abstraction of everything your PC is doing to try to land a blow on an opponent anyway.&nbsp; However, this means that there's no good reason to restrict PCs to using a light weapon in an off-hand.&nbsp; If they're not getting an extra attack with it, who cares?&nbsp; Any powers devoted to two-weapon fighitng can specify that one weapon must be light, if it seems important for balance reasons.&nbsp; If I'm running a game and a player tells me they're going to use a longsword in each hand, I'll shrug and tell them it's fine with me.&nbsp; If they have some sort of power that gives them two longsword attacks per round... that I might have to address.I do think that there should be some sort of general bonus to fighting with two weapons.&nbsp; Maybe it gives +1 to your AC or something, to represent the ability to parry.On Small/Medium/Large weapons: I approved of the change in 3.5, because it gave small races access to all weapons.&nbsp; In 4E, where many powers will be weapons-based, removing weapon size seems to impose an unfair restriction on Small PCs.&nbsp; They have less powers to choose from.&nbsp; Still, it's not that big a deal.&nbsp; It might possibly be interesting to introduce some weapons that are too small for medium-size races to properly wield down the road.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wolfwood2, post: 4208482, member: 39394"] My opinions: On two weapon fighting: I approve of the idea that holding a weapon in each hand does not get you an extra attack per round. An "attack" is just an abstraction of everything your PC is doing to try to land a blow on an opponent anyway. However, this means that there's no good reason to restrict PCs to using a light weapon in an off-hand. If they're not getting an extra attack with it, who cares? Any powers devoted to two-weapon fighitng can specify that one weapon must be light, if it seems important for balance reasons. If I'm running a game and a player tells me they're going to use a longsword in each hand, I'll shrug and tell them it's fine with me. If they have some sort of power that gives them two longsword attacks per round... that I might have to address. I do think that there should be some sort of general bonus to fighting with two weapons. Maybe it gives +1 to your AC or something, to represent the ability to parry. On Small/Medium/Large weapons: I approved of the change in 3.5, because it gave small races access to all weapons. In 4E, where many powers will be weapons-based, removing weapon size seems to impose an unfair restriction on Small PCs. They have less powers to choose from. Still, it's not that big a deal. It might possibly be interesting to introduce some weapons that are too small for medium-size races to properly wield down the road. [/QUOTE]

Verification