Races and Classes, Two-Weapon Fighting?

[joshmvii]

In my opinion, two weapon fighting is going to be much more viable for a ranger or rogue in 4e. Fighters are, after all, a Defender class, so the class is going to be designed to be a "tank," and two weapon fighting is generally something people want to do damage with. Of course, if they put some two weapon defense stuff in there, I suppose it could be alright, but I guess we'll see.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Sorry but a shield doesn't work by covering you up (apart from against certain missile weapons). As others have stated its all about deflection. This is much harder to master.

This isn't the experience of a friend of mine who has been fighting with and against shields for many years now.

I would also suggest that it isn't the experience of riot police, for whom shields are a wonderfully effective (and cost-effective) defence against individuals and not just missiles.

Furthermore, even IF shields are all about deflection of an attack, I would wager that it is much easier to deflect with a shield than a weapon (especially since the shield is likely being manipulated by your whole arm, and the weapon has a greater dependency upon the strength of your wrist).

Then when you look at fighting against creatures... I would think that you would have a much better chance of deflecting the claws or bite of a big creature with a big shield than you would with any single handed weapon.

 

[JVisgaitis]

This isn't the experience of a friend of mine who has been fighting with and against shields for many years now.

Indeed. Nor mine and I've been fighting with ARMA for almost 10 years. Shields are easy to use and are incredibly difficult to get around. I don't care about deflecting the blow and everything else. Yeah, its important. But they are lessons that you learn VERY quickly on the battlefield.

My main point is that using a shield is something that anyone can master and most people can do it fairly quickly. There are tons of people out there that just don't have the coordination to do footwork in conjunction with fighting with two blades ever. I don't care how much they practice.

Bottom line is that using sword and board is 1,000 times easier than using two swords. Don't believe me? Try it in your backyard with your friends. The learning curve on the guy stuck with the two weapons is going to be VERY steep compared to the sword and board user.

 

[Ian O'Rourke]

I can't back this up, but I have a strong feeling it's going to be a striker thing - it just feels right.

 

[Traycor]

It's not that hard. The thing to remember is that almost all TWF styles use the off-hand weapon primarily for defense. It's not all that different from using a shield.

Overrated? Maybe. It's more that shields tend to be severely underrated, than the alternatives being overrated.

I would also say that a TWF combatant that is ambidexteritous (like some baseball players that can bat from either side) can be very effective in combat. Being able to defend with either weapon or attack with either weapon can be deadly.

However, if you aren't good with two weapons, it's practically asking to get killed.

 

[Talislan]

Ok, so I have been explaining myself very badly with regards to a shield not being used to 'cover up'. I realise now how stupid i've been sounding.

What I am trying to get at is the difficulty in attacking from behind a shield in comparison to attacking with a weapon in each hand. As I mentioned earlier this is where the current rules fall down.
Shields are better defensively, that is not an arguement. I am trying to relate the currently innacurate (IMO) rule that it is harder to attack with a weapon in each hand (ie severe penalties to attacks with offhand weapons) with-out super advanced TWF, and yet you get an extra attack.

This is a bizarre rule. Yes it is easier to defend with a shield, but then you're effectively putting a wall of deflection between you and the oncoming blow. That wall is in the way, and has to be moved in order for you to counter. With TWF you have no wall to put in the way (or get in the way). You are trusting your dodge/maneuverability to get you out of the way. This means that defensively you are at a disadvantage but from an attacking stand point you couldn't be in a much more advantageous position.

So, what I would like to see:
Basic defensive advantage to carrying a shield
Basic attacking advantage for TWF (no disadvantage)
no extra attacks unless because of feat/style taken below
Feats for individual weapon & board trained style advantages (sword and shield, spear and shield etc)
Feats for individual twf trained style advantages. (sword & dagger dual Kukri etc)
Far more advancement/prereq's in order to gain two weapon defence would seem fair (min DEX15-Lvl10 IMO).

Bottom line, any style of fighting should require training otherwise you may as well do away with the wonderful variety of weapons out there...

all stated in my humble opinion.

T.

 

[Traycor]

With TWF you have no wall to put in the way (or get in the way). You are trusting your dodge/maneuverability to get you out of the way. This means that defensively you are at a disadvantage but from an attacking stand point you couldn't be in a much more advantageous position.

I'll disagree with you some there. I've trained in TWF for a little bit now. While you are in a position to attack faster than someone with a shield, you most definently have something in the way of your attack. With two large weapons they are easy to get tangled up and require some very fluid and practiced movements to keep your blades from just smacking into each other.

I could, however, see your point holding true for someone using a smaller offhand defensively. They wouldn't have anything in the way of their attacks.

 

[Talislan]

I'll disagree with you some there. I've trained in TWF for a little bit now. While you are in a position to attack faster than someone with a shield, you most definently have something in the way of your attack. With two large weapons they are easy to get tangled up and require some very fluid and practiced movements to keep your blades from just smacking into each other.

I could, however, see your point holding true for someone using a smaller offhand defensively. They wouldn't have anything in the way of their attacks.

So yes its faster than sword and board, but there is a need to apply a size limitation on the weapons involved?

ok. Twin short swords works fine (with necessary style training), twin long swords needs advanced training and higher Dex.
so TWF + style feat (twin blades) + advanced style (prob in line with tw defence @lvl10 min dex15) = can use twin long instead of short.

how's that sound?

 

[Traycor]

So yes its faster than sword and board, but there is a need to apply a size limitation on the weapons involved?

ok. Twin short swords works fine (with necessary style training), twin long swords needs advanced training and higher Dex.
so TWF + style feat (twin blades) + advanced style (prob in line with tw defence @lvl10 min dex15) = can use twin long instead of short.

how's that sound?

I'm still undecided on how TWF should apply to the rules. A regular "attack" actually represents an entire 6 second round of fighting, which could range from a single thrust to well over a dozen "sword swipes" in the same period of time.

So when it comes to weapon sizes, number of attacks, defense bonuses, etc... I think the main thing is that the ability should cause no penalties, but should cost something to aquire. So I must pick a class ability or spend a feat to get an advantage with TWF. Shields should give a flat bonus, but should have the ability to upgrade that advantage.

 

[Traycor]

The problem with Two-Weapon fighting with large blades is that mostly, it leads to what my friends and I call "the windmill effect." We have a buddy who used to do this in the SCA, and we put him to the test. With his rattan SCA sticks, he's fine. The sticks hit and do damage...no problem.

With a bladed weapon, it gets tricky. When you try to strike with the edge, the windmilling that's necessary to manipulate two large weapons tends to make you hit with, what, on an edged weapon, is the flat of the blade. Which is a great way to break your swords.

This is interesting. I've personally never had this problem, but I was also terrible at striking when I first started, so I had to spend weeks and weeks and weeks learning nothing but how to strike properly.

Now, no matter how fast I get the two swords going, the edge connects every time (unless my it's my poor fingers that connect)