Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: Re: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 02:38:08 -0600
Luc wrote:
>
>Actually sword play is complicated. The dificulty increases when an extra
>wepon is used and more so if different types of weapons are used. BTW the
>whole one lighter than the other rule seems silly to me seeing as i learn some
>sword fighting using 2 wooden swords of equal weight and size (actually
>different size and weight throughs me off a bit untill i practic a bit before
>hand).
>

I agree that two Rapier/Katana sized weapons would be very workable. I
would limit it to weapons with a reach of 1 and a weight of 2.0 Kg. (this
could be debatable for _Big Boys_)

Using a case of rapiers (that's one in each hand) would actially be better
than using two different weapons, since you can be extremely specialized in
one skill, rather than speding karma on skill for your secondary weapon.

Piatro
Message no. 2
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: Re: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 02:38:04 -0600
Robert Watkins complained:
>
>Thus saving all those extra combat pool dice for resisting damage. THAT's
>why I don't like those rules. All for only 1 Karma, too (the cost of
>learning a skill at level 1)
>

What do you think of this solution:

Instead of roling dice for each weapon, start with the skill and pool dice
for the primary weapon, which is _always_ the larger of the two. Then the
player adds dice for their multi-weapon skill (paid for as any other normal
skill). This skill can not be higher than that for either of the weapons,
since you have to be able to use each individually beffore you can combine
them in a fighting style.

The opponent gets a +1 TN modifier due to the fat that the attacker can
block and attack at the same time.


I threw a few dice to see how this would work out with two otherwise equal
characters. Each had a skill of 5 in Katana, but one also was using a knife
with a Katana/Knife skill of 4. In ten rolls, the character using two
weapons was able to stage up the damage past the single weapon damage (4 or
more net successes) seven times.

Piatro
Message no. 3
From: Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.com>
Subject: Re: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 08:29:45 -0500
I don't have any specific suggestions (or experience) with two weapon use, but
from reading the book of 5 rings, it seems to me that a good rule for this situation
would have the following properties:

With a well skilled user, two weapons gives more flexibiltiy of attack/defense. This
matches adding to the combat pool pretty well.

Using two weapons well is harder than using one weapon. This matches
increasing the target numbers.

One roll is better than two: the two weapon combination should be considered one
attack for both actions and counter-attacks.

Silly weapon combinations should not be very useful. This is the part that gets
tough to pin down. Rapier/Main Gauche works, longsword and switchblade does
not. Polearms are right out. A shield might actually work, counting as a weapon
but only for counter-attacks.

I'm going to think about this some more, and if I come up with a specific rule
suggestion, I'll post it.

Double-Domed Mike
Message no. 4
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <ojastej@******.sid.ncr.doe.ca>
Subject: RE: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 96 09:24:00 PDT
> What do you think of this solution:
>
> Instead of roling dice for each weapon, start with the skill and pool
dice
> for the primary weapon, which is _always_ the larger of the two. Then
the
> player adds dice for their multi-weapon skill (paid for as any other
normal
> skill). This skill can not be higher than that for either of the
weapons,
> since you have to be able to use each individually beffore you can
combine
> them in a fighting style.

So the equation (in dice) is Skill + Skill (from pool) + Multi
instead of Skill + Skill + Multi (from pool). Basically, you're
just moving the pool dice from the multiple weapon skill to the
individual weapon skill.

> The opponent gets a +1 TN modifier due to the fat that the attacker can

> block and attack at the same time.

Let's see... Art and Barb have Edged 6, Art has Dual 1, both have
6 combat pool. Art has -1 (at least) to power level, Barb has
+1 to TN. Art should get 6.5 successes (and empty his pool), Barb
should get 4 successes (and empty hers).

In the original, Art should get 6.5 successes (and have 5 pool
left), and Barb should get 6 successes (no pool left).

If Art has Dual 6, the numbers should be 9 (empty pool) and 4
(empty pool) for your version, and 9 (empty pool) and 4 (empty
pool) for the original.

So, if the multiple weapon skill is lower than the weapon skill,
you're basically just emptying the combat pool faster.

James

--
I can't be bothered to think up a generally witty comment right now, so
if you'll just leave your sense of humour at the tone...
Message no. 5
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: RE: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 14:00:35 -0600
James wrote:
>
>Let's see... Art and Barb have Edged 6, Art has Dual 1, both have
>6 combat pool. Art has -1 (at least) to power level, Barb has
>+1 to TN. Art should get 6.5 successes (and empty his pool), Barb
>should get 4 successes (and empty hers).
>
>In the original, Art should get 6.5 successes (and have 5 pool
>left), and Barb should get 6 successes (no pool left).
>
>If Art has Dual 6, the numbers should be 9 (empty pool) and 4
>(empty pool) for your version, and 9 (empty pool) and 4 (empty
>pool) for the original.

Wouldn't Barb still get 6 succcesses throwing the same dice against
the same target? (for FOF version)

>
>So, if the multiple weapon skill is lower than the weapon skill,
>you're basically just emptying the combat pool faster.
>

My system is closer to he original SR2 combat rules than the FOF
version for the reasons you have given. The combat pool is always
used the same way because it is the same kind of action. Using
your example, with a Dual skill of 1 Art's attack is marginally
more effective, but he has 5 pool dice left over to stage down
damage from other attacks. So if someone else shoots him right
after his attac,k he has pool dice to stage it down that he would
not have had if he was using a single weapon. This doesn''t make
any sense at all.

The bennefit of a two weapon style is that you can block your
opponents attack at the same time as you attack, or you can launch
two attacks letting your opponent parry one in order to get your
other attack to land. There are the only two options. Using two
weapons in no way makes it easier to deal with another attack,
especially if it is a firearms attack.

The drawback of using a two weapon style is that your blows
typically don't land as hard as when you're concentrating on a
single weapon. FOF indicates this by lowering the Damage Level
and averaging the power of the attack (depending on the weapons
used).

My changes to the _standard_ combat rules are:

A) +1 TN modifyer for a single weapon attack (or counter attack)
against an opponent using two weapons

B) Dual Weapon Skill dice are added to the combat test to reflect
the ammount of skill the character has in that specialized combat
style.

C) Damage Level and Power are reduced as described in FOF


In your example, with a skill of 1 in Dual Weapon Art was able to
stage the damage back up to its original level. With a skill of 6
he was able to stage it up to the next level. I think this increase
is apropriate for the increased flexibility of a two weapon style,
and reflects the time and energy (Karma) needed to increase the
characters skills to this level.



Does anyone else on the list have any RW experience in this area.
I have been fencing modern foil and saber for three years and "period"
rapier (sword and dagger, two swords, etc.) for one year. My rules
make sence with what I have experienced and the game results seem to
fit as well with no annoying side effects (the pool thing).

I welcome any reactions from fencers and non-fencers alike.

Piatro
Message no. 6
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <ojastej@******.sid.ncr.doe.ca>
Subject: RE: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 96 15:42:00 PDT
> >If Art has Dual 6, the numbers should be 9 (empty pool) and 4
> >(empty pool) for your version, and 9 (empty pool) and 4 (empty
> >pool) for the original.
>
> Wouldn't Barb still get 6 succcesses throwing the same dice against
> the same target? (for FOF version)

Typo-man strikes again. Read 9&4 and 9&6.

> damage from other attacks. So if someone else shoots him right
> after his attac,k he has pool dice to stage it down that he would
> not have had if he was using a single weapon. This doesn''t make
> any sense at all.

It makes sense to me - instead of moving his body (spending pool)
to avoid damage, he's blocking with another weapon. He can move
his body (spend pool) to avoid damage from the guns later.

> The bennefit of a two weapon style is that you can block your
> opponents attack at the same time as you attack, or you can launch
> two attacks letting your opponent parry one in order to get your
> other attack to land. There are the only two options. Using two
> weapons in no way makes it easier to deal with another attack,
> especially if it is a firearms attack.

However, if it's easier to defend against the other swordsman, the
attacker can pay more attention to the people pointing guns at
him/her.

[ talking about my example in the context of his rules ]
> In your example, with a skill of 1 in Dual Weapon Art was able to
> stage the damage back up to its original level. With a skill of 6
> he was able to stage it up to the next level. I think this increase
> is apropriate for the increased flexibility of a two weapon style,
> and reflects the time and energy (Karma) needed to increase the
> characters skills to this level.

So, you advocate making the attack more deadly while using more
combat pool - trading off more damage for less defense. I prefer
having longer, more defensive encounters myself.

> Does anyone else on the list have any RW experience in this area.
> I have been fencing modern foil and saber for three years and "period"
> rapier (sword and dagger, two swords, etc.) for one year. My rules
> make sence with what I have experienced and the game results seem to
> fit as well with no annoying side effects (the pool thing).

Never got around to learning fencing myself (it's on the list,
though! ;-).

> I welcome any reactions from fencers and non-fencers alike.

James

--
I can't be bothered to think up a generally witty comment right now, so
if you'll just leave your sense of humour at the tone...
Message no. 7
From: Wynd <jeltzz@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 00:36:47 +1000
Peter wrote:

> The bennefit of a two weapon style is that you can block your
> opponents attack at the same time as you attack, or you can launch
> two attacks letting your opponent parry one in order to get your
> other attack to land. There are the only two options. Using two
> weapons in no way makes it easier to deal with another attack,
> especially if it is a firearms attack.

It depends. A few weapons are actually designed for dealing
with multiple assailants, but anyway...

> The drawback of using a two weapon style is that your blows
> typically don't land as hard as when you're concentrating on a
> single weapon. FOF indicates this by lowering the Damage Level
> and averaging the power of the attack (depending on the weapons
> used).
>
> My changes to the _standard_ combat rules are:
>
> A) +1 TN modifyer for a single weapon attack (or counter attack)
> against an opponent using two weapons
>
> B) Dual Weapon Skill dice are added to the combat test to reflect
> the ammount of skill the character has in that specialized combat
> style.
>
> C) Damage Level and Power are reduced as described in FOF
>
> In your example, with a skill of 1 in Dual Weapon Art was able to
> stage the damage back up to its original level. With a skill of 6
> he was able to stage it up to the next level. I think this increase
> is apropriate for the increased flexibility of a two weapon style,
> and reflects the time and energy (Karma) needed to increase the
> characters skills to this level.
>
> Does anyone else on the list have any RW experience in this area.
> I have been fencing modern foil and saber for three years and "period"
> rapier (sword and dagger, two swords, etc.) for one year. My rules
> make sence with what I have experienced and the game results seem to
> fit as well with no annoying side effects (the pool thing).

I have had RW experience with dual weapons. Twin daggers, nunchaku,
and chinese broadswords (sort of like scimitars but not as long and
less curve). Your rules seem sensible, and I may playtest them for
a while.

--
Wynd, the Zen-Taoist-Celtic Mystic-Poet-Philosopher-Warrior-Dude
<jeltzz@*******.com.au>
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~jeltzz

"For I am known, | "The Ravens took flight,
As the Fallen One, | and the sky, just moments Winter's white
He-Who-Walks-Alone, | turned black, as if night had descended"
Under Star, Moon and Sun." | - Flight of the Ravens
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Message no. 8
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.net.au>
Subject: Re: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 96 11:37:00 +1100
>I agree that two Rapier/Katana sized weapons would be very workable. I
>would limit it to weapons with a reach of 1 and a weight of 2.0 Kg. (this
>could be debatable for _Big Boys_)
>
>Using a case of rapiers (that's one in each hand) would actially be better
>than using two different weapons, since you can be extremely specialized in
>one skill, rather than speding karma on skill for your secondary weapon.

It's not the WEIGHT of the weapons that makes two-weapon combat
difficult. You can spin around iron bars that are heavier than rapiers,
no worries. It's the length... when you combine length and weight, it
means you can't control the blade as well, and when you have two weapons
that long, they get in the way.

The restriction on the second weapon's size comes from logistics, not
strength. For example, the Japanese technique of katana and wakizashi is
actually designed for attacking multiple opponents, not a single
opponent. This way, the two blades don't get in the way.


--
*************************************************************************
* .--_ # "My opinions may have changed, but not the fact *
* _-0(#)) # that I'm right." -- Old Fortune Saying *
* @__ )/ # *
* )=(===__==,= # Robert Watkins <---> robertdw@*******.com.au *
* {}== \--==--`= # *
* ,_) \ # "A friend is someone who watches the same *
* L_===__)=, # TV programs as you" *
*************************************************************************
Message no. 9
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.net.au>
Subject: Re: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 96 11:36:47 +1100
>What do you think of this solution:
>
>Instead of roling dice for each weapon, start with the skill and pool dice
>for the primary weapon, which is _always_ the larger of the two. Then the
>player adds dice for their multi-weapon skill (paid for as any other normal
>skill). This skill can not be higher than that for either of the weapons,
>since you have to be able to use each individually beffore you can combine
>them in a fighting style.

Not bad... I actually suggested something like this earlier, with the
addition that the extra dice had to come from a _different_ skill than
the primary weapon. Eg, a concentration or specialisation, or Armed
Combat and Unarmed combat (good for getting in close with the cyberspurs,
for example)


--
Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
Message no. 10
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: Re: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 00:43:25 -0600
Robert Watkins wrote:
>
>The restriction on the second weapon's size comes from logistics, not
>strength. For example, the Japanese technique of katana and wakizashi is
>actually designed for attacking multiple opponents, not a single
>opponent. This way, the two blades don't get in the way.
>
>

Interesting...

So when using this style you would make two seperate attacks, dividing
your attention (read combat pool) between the attacks and resisting
possible damage? Does each target get an equal chance to counterattack?
If you are concentrating both attacks on one person, how do you traet
their attemts to counter attack or avoid damage?

The more we discuss this te more questions I have. Any answers for me
(both in game terms and RW)?

Piatro
Message no. 11
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: RE: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 00:43:20 -0600
James wrote:
>
>However, if it's easier to defend against the other swordsman, the
>attacker can pay more attention to the people pointing guns at
>him/her.
>

It is not "easyer," merely more effective. When using a two weapon
style you must still concentrate on your opponent in order to be
successful. I concider this the function of the combat pool. Paying
more attention to the people with guns translates in game mechanics
as saving your combat pool to use against later attacks. In my system
either combatant can hold pool dice in reserve. Art, using his Dual
style, still gets the die bonus and the TN penalty even if he saves
his pool dice. This retains the balancing act that makes SR2 combat
so dynamic. Each character has to decide how much he will put into
each attack, estimating he abilities of his opponent and the possible
outcomes.

Lets go back to the example:

Art and Bart are both hoarding their pool dice. Art throws 7 dice
(6-edged weapon + 1 Dual) at the standard target of 4. Bart throws
his 6 dice at a target of 5. Art averages 3.5 successes and Bart gets 2.
Bart has pool dice to help stage down the damage and Art is ready to
shrug off a bullet in the back.


The FOF eliminates this aspect of decision making. With just a skill
lelev of 1 in the Dual Weapon skill, a character can double his attack
dice and save _all_ of his pool for other purposes.

Art would be automatiacally throwing 12 dice even if he saved the 1
pool die he is allowed. Bart, on the other hand is limited to 6. As
you can see, even tough they both have their entire combat pool saved,
this 6-3 success advantage is overwelming. I feel this disrupts the
flow and underlying concepts behind the combat system as a whole.


Piatro

P.S. I didn't know that I felt this strongly about two weapon combat!
Message no. 12
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: RE: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 01:01:43 -0600
A friend of mine brought up a few more questions:


[snip quote that you have read and ego warming support}

> I would hate to have to add separate combat
>pools for melee and firearms, etc., so I see this as the only logical
>solution without upsetting game balance. How would this affect martial arts
>and armed combat combined attacks? Would the martial artist with the skill
>in combat axe be able to take a dual weapon skill to be able to parry and
>attack simultaniously? Hmmm?
>
>
>Dan
(AKA - Ahzmandius)


So how would the dual weapon concept relate to standard unarmed attacks?

Piatro
Message no. 13
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <ojastej@******.sid.ncr.doe.ca>
Subject: RE: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 96 08:46:00 PDT
> >However, if it's easier to defend against the other swordsman, the
> >attacker can pay more attention to the people pointing guns at
> >him/her.
>
> It is not "easyer," merely more effective. When using a two weapon

OK, but the same level of effectiveness should still require less
attention.

> style you must still concentrate on your opponent in order to be
> successful. I concider this the function of the combat pool. Paying

So do I. Yay! We agreed!

> Lets go back to the example:

OK, so if Art's using a Katana and a knife, Art gets a net of
1.5 successes at (str+1)L with your rules, and a net of 3
successes at (str+1)L with FOF. The extra successes don't
much matter, since even with 3 net successes, if the damage
is starting at (str+1)L instead of (str+3)M, it'll be much
easier to ignore.

> Art would be automatiacally throwing 12 dice even if he saved the 1
> pool die he is allowed. Bart, on the other hand is limited to 6. As

But what if they do use pool? In your rules, Art (with a dual-w
skill of 1) expects to get 13*.5 = 7.5 successes. Bart expects
12*.3 = 4 successes. In FOF, Art expects 13*.5 = 7.5, and Bart
expects 12*.5 = 6 successes. So, if they both use pool, your
rules are more deadly. If they don't, then the FOF rules are
more deadly.

I guess the real question here is how the players normally use
the skill - that is, when the spend pool, how much pool they have,
and how deadly they like to play.

> P.S. I didn't know that I felt this strongly about two weapon combat!

I don't. I just like to argue^H^H^H^H^Hdebate. :-)

James

--
I can't be bothered to think up a generally witty comment right now, so
if you'll just leave your sense of humour at the tone...
Message no. 14
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: RE: Some questions -(two weapons)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 1996 19:45:52 -0600
James wrote:

[sinp]

>
>> style you must still concentrate on your opponent in order to be
>> successful. I concider this the function of the combat pool. Paying
>
>So do I. Yay! We agreed!
>

[snip again]

>
>But what if they do use pool? In your rules, Art (with a dual-w
>skill of 1) expects to get 13*.5 = 7.5 successes. Bart expects
>12*.3 = 4 successes. In FOF, Art expects 13*.5 = 7.5, and Bart
>expects 12*.5 = 6 successes. So, if they both use pool, your
>rules are more deadly. If they don't, then the FOF rules are
>more deadly.
>
>I guess the real question here is how the players normally use
>the skill - that is, when the spend pool, how much pool they have,
>and how deadly they like to play.
>

This is exactly why I don't like the FOF rules. The player doesn't have to=
make any decisions about using his pool. At the first skill level he can=
either throw one pool die into his attack roll or not, it really makes no=
difference. but in _normal_ combat he has to make these decisions with=
evert action. In the my rules if one combatant uses his pool for the=
attack, and the other doesn't, the balance shifts.

Piatro

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Some questions -(two weapons), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!