| From: | Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 2 handed style question |
| Date: | Sun, 25 Jun 1995 13:57:06 GMT |
> not too mention the ambidextours rules :- the bettter you are at shooting,
> the worse you are with your off hand???
Yeah, it wasn't good... For Firearms we used the off-hand at +2, and
you only get smartlink bonus if you a) have two links and b) fire both
guns at the same target. We discourage double-SMG work... but this
style does work well with a pair of pistols. John Woo rules!
> My own fix is pretty drekky though, just let the use the off-hand at
> a +2 Off-hand penalty, and a +2 2nd attack penalty if they hit someone
> else.... ubnfortuantely it leafs to absolutlely lethal off-hand attacks.
> Not good..
> Anyone got any better?
For hand-to-hand and a two-weapon style we ended up trading reach: two
reach 1 weapons equal one Reach 2, or two Reach 0 add up to Reach 1.
That made learning to use a dual style useful but not the sort of
giant-killer that extra attacks give.
After all, when I fenced "for fun" after the actual training, we
found that what you did with your free hand and your feet could make
a big difference: having a knife in my off hand would have helped some,
but "freestyle" kicking the other guy's ankle could win the fight.
Basically it's hard to get realistic in combat systems: just decide the style
you want and kick the rules to make that a good way to work.
--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.
Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
