Topic: Two Weapon Combo Question

[Nejira]

Hi, I got in doubt when talking about the Two Weapon Combo combat manuever with one of my players.

Do you need to select two different weapons in the combo? Eg: Longsword/shortsword.

Or Can you select the same weapon in the combo? Eg: Longsword/longsword.

The first way means you have to rise two weapon skills, whereas the last you can "save" points by choosing the same weapon to use in the combo.

/Nejira

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

You still have to have 2 different weapon skills. As when you learn a weapon, you learn it for the dominant hand. You would then need to learn it for the other hand as well - as a separate skill, before you can learn it as a combo.

[naphta23]

Which means a character has to learn "short sword (off-hand)" first, before learning "long sword / short sword," for example? 

Well, I do not know if the extra DP would be worth the effort to learn 2-wpn-combat - that would be 2 extra skills to be developed. Isn't that a bit harsh?

[Nejira]

It would be three skills in total. One weapon skill for the primary hand and one for the secondary, and then the combat maneuever: Two Weapon Combo.

I dont think its harsh, its a pretty good maneuver. Gives you two attack per action, allows you to parry with the offhand while fighting with the primary, etc.

[mathhatt]

allows you to parry with the offhand while fighting with the primary, etc.

Not really, when you parry, the OB you put in DB is substracted from both attacks (in a single melee action)

Personally I don't use the "each hand needs a separate skill" rule. My house rule is : 1 skill is developped for each kind of weapon (longsword for example works for both longsword and broadsword and similar weapons). If you use your 'off-hand' you have a penalty of -20. You don't suffer this penalty if you have more than 10 ranks in two-weapon combo maneuver.
I used to practice a martial arts with sticks, and it is quite easy to become proficient with two weapons at the same time (hence my 10 ranks in 2wcombo house rule), I don't really think it is worth the amount of additionnal DPs spent in the standard rule.

[naphta23]

I wasn't sure if Rasyr posted that a character would have to learn the weapon skill for the off hand (again). Meaning that I would not only have to learn short sword, but also an extra skill to use the short sword in my off-hand. If I already learned to fight with a short sword and want to use it with a long sword in combination, would I need to learn that off-hand-skill in order to learn 2-wpn-combat? If so, 4 skills would be needed and I doubt the costs would be justified, IMO.

Mathhatt, did you learn Arnis, Kali or Escrima by any chance? 
Well, if you know how to use Sinawalis, 2-wpn-combat isn't difficult to master - but I doubt many European fighters in the Dark or Medieval Ages had invented similar styles. Without such knowledge and easily learnable combos it gets quite tricky, me thinks.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

If you use your 'off-hand' you have a penalty of -20. You don't suffer this penalty if you have more than 10 ranks in two-weapon combo maneuver..... I don't really think it is worth the amount of additionnal DPs spent in the standard rule.

I feel, more or less, the same. My own house rule is that generally if there is a similarity of some sort between the weapons used some sort of similarity bonus can be apllied. So I allow the inital combination choice to be developed at full cost (as per the rules) and then simply half the ranks bonus when applying the skill to other combinations.

For other combinations, I still allow a degree of similarity,since part of the skill is overcoming co-ordination issues rather that weapon issues so only 1/4 of the ranks apply and so on... and in ALL cases the skill is limited to the lower of the weapon skill or the TW-combo.

[RandalThor]

Yeah, we did the same. You would train in the weapons at hand, for example: longsword / shortsword, and then you would train in 2-weapon combat for those weapons. This way, it was 3 skills. As the vast majority of the players that made characters to use two weapon combat would pick the talent ambidexterity (we went with talent points), we never needed to make a rule about losing the -20 in the off-hand.

I would say that the main reason european warriors did not develop two weapon combat like many SE asians did, was due to the quality of metal as it pertains to both armor and weapons. A suit of plate or even chain armor would be a little too much for escrima sticks, and the steel sword would be able to cut right through the mostly wooden weapons that were developed for two handed use (the lightness of it made wood more practical). I am sure there are other reasons, and the massive thurough nature of the RM designers will have them brimming as they prepare to respond with their super detailed information. 

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

1) I only reported my interpretation of the rules up above. If you are not happy with that, then change them for YOUR game. I had nothing to do with the design of RMSS/FRP. 

2) In the original RM rules (and core RMC rules), to use a 2 handed combo, you had to know both weapons, but there wasn't a special skill just for it. It was basically automatic so long as you had the other skills.

3) It was Rolemaster Companion II that introduced TWC as a separate skill, and it required learning a weapon skill for each hand as a separate skill. This is what was carried over into RMSS/FRP.

4) The Combat Companion, which can be used with RMSS/FRP has TWC being a single skill, without any prerequisite skills. The skill will have a higher cost, yes, but it is at least a single skill.

5) Most european combat used single weapon and a shield, or 2 handed weapons. It wasn't until dueling came into fashion that two weapon combos began to appear. In France you had weapon and main gauche. In Italy, you had a light weapon and a cloak most often (IIRC). And this can likely be traced back to ancient Rome and it gladiatorial days when the gladiators fought with a short sword or trident and a net (mostly guessing here hehe).

6) If you look at those cultures who did use two weapon combos, you'll notice something. Every single one of them used light weapons. Long Swords and/or Broadswords were rare, mostly you had rapiers or sabres, 2 short swords (i.e. butterfly swords), two short sticks (escrima sticks), etc. Never any really heavy weapons.

I think that about covers everything..

[twh]

6) If you look at those cultures who did use two weapon combos, you'll notice something. Every single one of them used light weapons. Long Swords and/or Broadswords were rare, mostly you had rapiers or sabres, 2 short swords (i.e. butterfly swords), two short sticks (escrima sticks), etc. Never any really heavy weapons.

Excellent point.  I just added that to my house rules.

[markc]

 The one culture I know that used 2 larger weapons was Japan, and it was taught as a style in a school.

 In my RMSS game for 2 weapon combo I require off hand small weapon, dom. hand larger weapon and 2-Wep Combo skill with the right order. Now ambidexterity can limit the penalty and if you by the highest version [house rule] you do not have to buy the off hand skill. So I have limited the 2 weapon combs to almost be a genetic subsection of the populace.
 Also if 2 weapon combo was easy IMO everyone would do it. But as we know that is not the case.

 Note: I also use a different combat system so I will have different view points from RMSS combat.
 Note 2: I also like the MAC rules for weapon arts as well as the new Combat Comp ruels. IMO you can adapt the Combat Comp rules into you RMSS game fairly easily.

MDC

[Arioch]

The one culture I know that used 2 larger weapons was Japan, and it was taught as a style in a school.

What style are you talking about? The only japanese 2 weapons fighter that comes to my mind is Musashi, and IIRC he used a katana and a wakizashi.

Note 2: I also like the MAC rules for weapon arts as well as the new Combat Comp ruels. IMO you can adapt the Combat Comp rules into you RMSS game fairly easily.

Yes, CC is very easy to use with RMSS/FRP and also removes the need of various skills:

Combat Manuevers
- 2 Weapon Fighting
- Weapon Style
- Reverse Stroke

MA Combat Manuevers
- Martial Arts Style

Special Attacks
- Brawling
- Disarm (Armed/Unarmed)
- Racial Attacks

Special Defenses
- Adrenal Defense

[markc]

 I was thinking of Musashi and I think he used 2 bokken as well as rarely 2 katanas. But the 2 katanas might be wrong as it was sometime ago that I read about him. I am fairly sure about the 2 bokken though.

MDC

[Arioch]

That's possible, after all Musashi was a legendary hero, able of feats deemed impossible by other men, just like the one accomplished by PCs!   

[runequester]

I wouldnt treat off hand use as a separate skill personally.

As far as weapon choices, I'd lean towards the "one normal, one small" approach. Worked fine enough in AD&D

[markc]

That's possible, after all Musashi was a legendary hero, able of feats deemed impossible by other men, just like the one accomplished by PCs!   

 And if I remember right it was not untill the end of his carear that he realised that he could use 2 weapons to throw off his opponets and force them to deal with a unknown.

MDC

[providence13]

Well, gosh!

I had always thought that learning a specific weapon gave you the knowledge to use that weapon and IF you used it with the wrong hand it was -20 for off hand..
(I use only -15 for lefties 'cause they are use to adapting to a right-handed world  )

But this sounds like .... if you don't have "off-hand weapon skill" of the same weapon that you have "dominant hand weapon skill" then you are totally unskilled (ignoring the Cat for a minute) in that weapon.......... AND -20!? So, "no Rank"...... -15 and "off hand"..... -20 =   -35 if you don't develop "off hand weapon skill of the same type as dominant hand".
And even then, you'd have to develop it until it off-sets the -35 penalty... ??

But, maybe I'm totally wrong..

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Well, gosh!

I had always thought that learning a specific weapon gave you the knowledge to use that weapon and IF you used it with the wrong hand it was -20 for off hand..

But this sounds like .... if you don't have "off-hand weapon skill" of the same weapon that you have "dominant hand weapon skill" then you are totally unskilled (ignoring the Cat for a minute) in that weapon.......... AND -20!?

It depends on which version of RM you are using.....

For example, in RMC core (and RM2 core), you had to have skill in both weapons (the hand for which the weapon was learned did not matter). and the off-hand got a -20 modifier (there are a few other bits to it, but they don't matter for this discussion). There is no actual TWC skill.

With the addition of RoCo II and also in RMSS/FRP, there is a TWC skill, and it requires that you learn each of the two weapons separately, for hand in which it would be used in the combo (i.e. to use a dagger in the off-hand of a combo, you had to learn it in the off hand, separately from learning it in the main hand). And each combo was considered to be completely separate from one another, even if they used the same weapons (i.e. Mace in right hand, dagger in left is a different TWC skill than a dagger in right hand, mace in left).

In Combat Companion, TWC is a combat style, and may or may not require the character to have separate skill in the weapons of the TWC style, based upon how the style is actually built.

[Marc R]

I beleive much of that cha-cha was done expressly for game balance reasons to tighten up costs.

This was due to Fighter 1 taking broadsword (1/5) and Dagger (2/7), while fighter 2 just took Shortsword (1/5) and used one in each hand.

The collective group of fighter 1s complained to the collective GMs that they were paying 2-9 DP more a level to get a 2ndary attack that was less effective than the 2ndary shortsword attack fighter 2 was getting for free.

Toss in a TWC skill cost on top of that to pay for the 2ndary attack.

All in all, in retrospect, I think TWC has been mishandled in every instance. . .if the guy fighting two handed style can make two attack rolls, it makes at least as much sense for the guy with the rapier to make two attack rolls. . . .

RM always had a one melee roll per round (and a long 10 sec round at that) not on the logic you only had time for one attack, but that the combined effects of all attacks made in 10 seconds would be resolved via 1 roll.

By that logic, fighting TW style should really just mean you resolve one attack. The number of weapons in hand makes no big difference to me against the "sum of 10 seconds of attempts" logic, since even fighting one handed with a dagger, I happen to have a perfectly good fist, a skull for butting and matched sets of elbows, knees and feet ready for use. . .shall I get 9 attacks per round?

IMO you should really just get 1 attack per round, regardless of how many weapons you have handy. . . .and if anyone is going to get multiples, it should just apply to any form of attack in some global logic like "Make two attack rolls at 50% activity / -50 OB" or "Make three attack rolls at 33% activity / -67 OB" or whatever. . . .

TWC became the rule that required exceptions, because it offered a "Free" extra attack roll. . .I don't think the rules ever got it right for cost or mechanics, since the logic was fatally flawed from the start.

[mocking bird]

With the addition of RoCo II and also in RMSS/FRP, there is a TWC skill, and it requires that you learn each of the two weapons separately, for hand in which it would be used in the combo (i.e. to use a dagger in the off-hand of a combo, you had to learn it in the off hand, separately from learning it in the main hand). And each combo was considered to be completely separate from one another, even if they used the same weapons (i.e. Mace in right hand, dagger in left is a different TWC skill than a dagger in right hand, mace in left).

It isn't explicitly stated you need to learn the off-hand skill additionally in RMSS unless it was erratta'd sometime.  Only that you need to learn each pairing separately.

Two Weapon Fighting skill must be developed for each individual two-weapon combination (e.g. shortsword/handaxe, rapier/dagger, etc.)

and

Using the off-hand:  Each weapon combinatin is considered to have been developed for each specific weapon in a specific hand.  For example, a Rogue trained in a rapier/dagger combination might have decided to use the rapier left-handed and the dagger in his right .  Sweithing either weapon to the otehr hand incurs the normal -20 penalty for use with the off-hand.

If you do need to learn each weapon separately for each hand then why is there still a -20 off hand penalty since by learning each weapon skill there would no longer be an off hand?

Then again all this is rendered moot as I have yet to see a player who wants to TWC not take ambidextrous...

Now to gum up the works further you have MAC options of 'additional attack' where you have the style and weapon skills and just attack twice at -20 or the paired attack where you do an additional crit -2 severity.   The CC seems to have similar options.