Does anyone have any examples of a combat run with a two-weapon fighter? Would fighting with two weapons change the fiction all that much or would the second weapon, perhaps, just add a damage bonus to an attack?
Does anyone have any examples of a combat run with a two-weapon fighter?
Does anyone have any examples of a combat run with a two-weapon fighter?
There’s no mechanical change. The only thing that changes is the fiction. You have, and can use two weapons.
When I used two weapon fighting, I gave my player a choice between the ranger move (accurate and deadly strike style) or something similar to DND where they get to attack twice with less accuracy (wild but dangerous style)
The great thing about not having a mechanical difference between fighting styles is that the mechanics support your version of awesome, no matter what it is.
I look at it like this. What kind of things can you do when wielding two weapons that you couldn’t do when fighting with just one?
Meh, Fighting with two weapons gives you a parrying advantage. Fighting with one gives you a reach advantage and the ability to grapple. I’d say they just cancel each other out.
Brandon Paul what do you mean by “attack twice with less accuracy”? I’m asking because I can’t see it (a single hack & slash roll may contain various blows within the same exchange, while the roll itself doesn’t reflect accuracy at all. Maybe it’s something about damage?)
You add the tags from both weapons to your attack. If you are dual-wielding a short sword and a dagger, than you can use the dagger at hand range and the short sword at close.
If you have two longswords you get +2 damage at close range, but can’t attack at reach or hand range.
Real world common fighting styles were sword+parring dagger, axe+dagger, and possibly two blades. Main hand weapon was used for reach and damage, second hand weapon for parrying and attacking in case the opponent got too close. Using two short weapons, like the japanese sai (Raphael or Elektra) one can attack and parry with both at the same time without having to move.
The difference in style should be described in the fiction, where all the differences in weapons belong (characters do damage based on class, not weapons).
If one wants to really make it matter mechanically, Kasper Brohus Allerslev and Bismuth Crystal have suggestions that make it work without overpowering.
Brandon Paul if it’s a class move, only a character that has the move (by class or multiclassing) can take and use the move. if it’s not a basic, special, or custom move, the outcome must be decided with fiction and standard moves. Class moves are what makes playing a class special. Do you also allow all characters casting spells with the wizard move? That’s exactly the same situation.
Paride Papadia Most of the time if you didn’t need a two handed weapon to deal with armour, warriors would choose a shield or buckler/rotella/targe rather than a dagger. Sword and dagger is really a fairly late period civilian self defence/duelling thing.
Stuart McDermid yes, more rapier than sword, actually. The hatchet and blade style I remember was used in real battles from some population, I don’t remind which one and my google fu is failing me. Pointers?
This has gotten off topic Paride Papadia so this will be my last post. I’m happy to take this offline for some pointers if you want to start researching this stuff; just tag me into a post.
Anyway, In period people just called their swords swords generally regardless of their design (even rapiers). The only hawk and dagger I can think of is American Frontier period and I’m not sure of sources or authenticity in this case.
The Ranger Move: Viper’s Strike is the only move that I know of that alters the damage based on fighting with two weapons. Other than that it’s just in the fiction as how the character fights. Some weapons tags may or may not apply, but not much beyond that.
+Alessandro Gianni
Well, In my games I use weapon damage. So if a sword is 1d6, then they can roll 2d6 ( best of 1d6 could work better, in hindsight) but they take a penalty to hack and slash…meaning that in the fiction they are swinging wildly and leave themselves open.
Brandon Paul ok thanks, now I see your point; I asked because I’m fiddling with damage and weapon combinations for some hack of mine. I don’t necessarily agree with it though 😛 class damage is actually a very sensed thing – a fighter is equally dangerous with both dagger and greataxe; the difference between them is in range, style and tactics. Removing it would work if you removed classes as they are… And fighting wildly is already covered by exposing yourself to an attack in exchange of +1d6 damage with a 10+; a penalty to hack & slash means more soft and hard moves by the gm, which may or may not involve the character actually exposing itself. Well. To each his own! 🙂