Double lightsabers?

[ZzaphodD]

How do you handle NPCs fighting with two lightsabers?

In other systems this might get you an additional attack/parry with some penalties, giving the user a choice of tactics.

With the MAP rules an additional attack is easily achieved with the drawback of one additional MAP, so here the benefit is not that clear. Giving the user a 'free attack' is also easily translated into the extra CPs that raising the lightsaber skill one additional Dice. Then the only difference will be the lack of MAPs for other actions taken (if any) while fighting. ATM I see no other solution, perhaps some bonus (+5) to parry might do the trick but does not seem to fit with the image that two weapon jedis seems like offensive fighters. A penalty to the opponents defence (for one attack or all)?
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course..

[cheshire]

I've thought that keeping the difficulty the same, and adding a +2 to each roll when performing multiple actions would give some benefit, without making it an horribly unbalanced weapon. Perhaps a +3, but that seems a little "un-D6'ish."

Upping the difficulty and then adding a +5 seems to be a bit much, especially when the average roll on a D6 is 3.5.
_________________
__________________________________
Before we take any of this too seriously, just remember that in the middle episode a little rubber puppet moves a spaceship with his mind.

[ZzaphodD]

My thinking you would have to have some kind of skill to wield two lightsabers effectively. Either a separate skill, or an Advanced skill with Lightsaber as basis (seems most logical). This costs CPs which otherwise could be spent in just raising the normal Lightsaber skill. As higher skill means you can make more attacks you have to come up with a rule that both reflects the CPs, but also does not become a no-brainer.

The ideal would be rules that reflect that this is a choice in combat method with both a advantage and some disadvantage, preferably not easily translated into CPs for min/maxing.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course..

[ZzaphodD]

[cheshire]

In terms of game mechanics it's really hard to replicate real life here. I can say with some authority what it is like fighting with various styles and types of blades.

If you're fighting rapier vs. rapier, there are going to be advantages and disadvantages of fighting different styles. If I tried to learn a new style, I would be far worse a competitor than if I fought in my typical style. For example, I have a fighting style that is based largely off of Capo Ferro as well as one or two other individuals. If I were to try to switch to Thibault, it would take me quite a while to get as good as I am with the Capo Ferro mix I'm using now. That's just learning a new style of a blade with which you are already proficient.

Now, let's say that you're throwing learning a second weapon within the same style you're proficient. That's easier than switching styles, but there is a BIG learning curve. Already you're dividing your attention between two weapons and the various attacks and parries. Ideally, all parries/voids are taken in the same tempo as an attack (i.e. the defense and counterattack happen simultaneously). This is really hard to do when you're just first learning how to wield a second weapon. However, with sufficient practice you become much more of a threat due to the nature of your parries having greater range, and your attacks having more mobility and more angles lines of attack.

Learning how to fight two handed when you're used to fighting one-handed is also going to be a bit of a learning curve, unless you're trained to do both at the same time, say with a b@st@rd* sword. So even then you're also looking at a learning curve, though I think this aspect is less your point.

When fighting single vs. double the one-handed swordsman has the advantage of range, while the double-handed swordsman has the advantage of control. However, it is REALLY REALLY REALLY freakin' difficult to control two blades at once if your opponent has any sort of clue what they're doing with their blades. They generally try not to cross their blades, or even let their blades be "on the same plane" as they say. If the blades are close enough to parallel, then one sweep can take them both out of the fight. A good swordsman has been trained not to let this happen (though it does happen even to the best of us).

If you'd like a report of how this works, I can request that some people fight case while I fight with a double-handed sword, and I can let you know how that all turns out, but the few times I've done this, I've been at a disadvantage wielding a single double-handed sword.

This is not to say that I've never defeated a double-wielder while I'm fighting single sword (whether one or two-handed). However, the process by which one would win or lose such a fight is not easily translated into game mechanics. Any representation of the real fight would either be 1) horribly complicated or 2) extremely hollow, and not representative of real life. I actually advocate going with doing something hollow and being honest about what you're doing, since that's what is likely to happen in the end anyway.

I think I've compiled a list of how people handle two weapon fighting, and it's a varied list. Each have their own advantages and disadvantages, and I've even applied a couple of them in my games. (One of them that I used for the longest was granting a free defensive action with no MAP, when the person was wielding two swords. However, I'd do things differently now if I had the chance to do it again.)
_________________
__________________________________
Before we take any of this too seriously, just remember that in the middle episode a little rubber puppet moves a spaceship with his mind.

[cheshire]

P.S. If it gives you any idea of how difficult this sort of thing might be to plan mechanically, take a look at this video. It's got two people who know their stuff. Then imagine if the single-handed fighter had two weapons. It would be a real meat grinder. Of course, note that the single-handed fighter is really, really good and has apparently adapted the Capo Ferro style to fighting against a longsword.

Familiarity with the other person's fighting style is also relevant to how well one fights against someone, but we can't even BEGIN to think of how to do that mechanically.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r7VWIQCHvM&p=8B09394276EACCE1&playnext=1&index=28
_________________
__________________________________
Before we take any of this too seriously, just remember that in the middle episode a little rubber puppet moves a spaceship with his mind.

[garhkal]

TO me, when i gm, i have wielding ANY melee weapon in pairs as being double the MAPS for doing so. Blasters on the other hand, i leave as is.
I could see making it an advance skill with the requisit melee at 5d... and the D in this is used to only offset maps you get for dual wielding..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[ZzaphodD]

[Ankhanu]

[cheshire]

[ZzaphodD]

[ZzaphodD]

[cheshire]

[atgxtg]

Simple Method: A character fighting with two sabers can do one addtional lightsaber action before suffering MAPs.


Advaned Method: Treat the srtyle as a specilization, but I use Legend D6 specilizations (that is they add to the base skill, but are improved of seperarely).

I've got a few special tricks for paired lightsabers in the duleling rules I'm working on, too. 'I hope to playtrest the dueling rules soon, now that the PC Jedi has enough dice to be able to raise lightsaber combat).

[Ankhanu]

Personally, I really dislike the idea of using specializations to represent difficult skill sets like this. I've seen the same thing done for lightsaber forms and it just doesn't make sense. The use of Advanced skills for these concepts is much more appropriate.
_________________
Hotaru no Hishou; a messageboard about games, friends and nothing at all.

Donate to Ankhanu Press