Forum > Rolemaster
TWC and full parry
Marc R:
A popular tactic with Sword-n-Dagger was to swap from parrying with the dagger and attacking with the sword, to parrying with the sword to attack with the dagger. . .which could easily be done with normal one hand combat rules to switch back and forth. . .but the feint benefit inherent in that swap-n-swap is absent in the rules. . .
Also, rather than dual attack, generally two weapon attacks vs one weapon one weapon was used primarily to parry, deflect and control the enemy weapon, while you stab or slash them with the other. . .which is exactly the full OB right hand/Full DB left hand scenario which the rules as is specifically are written to stop.
I think HARP actually distinguished the dual weapon attack method from the two weapon attack method.
pastaav:
I have spent pretty much time with two weapons in LARP combat, and the difficulty of TWC is very much that you can't have attention on more than one weapon at each moment. You can do practiced standard moves with your secondary weapon, but for the second weapon you must depend on lots of repetitive training for it to be of any use. The effectivity of TWC comes from that you can change what weapon that is the primary weapon and get a surprise attack. It is harder to use your off hand to parry with, but it is small thing compared to everything else that make combat hard to learn.
markc:
--- Quote from: pastaav on January 12, 2011, 02:52:25 PM ---I have spent pretty much time with two weapons in LARP combat, and the difficulty of TWC is very much that you can't have attention on more than one weapon at each moment. You can do practiced standard moves with your secondary weapon, but for the second weapon you must depend on lots of repetitive training for it to be of any use. The effectivity of TWC comes from that you can change what weapon that is the primary weapon and get a surprise attack. It is harder to use your off hand to parry with, but it is small thing compared to everything else that make combat hard to learn.
--- End quote ---
I think this is an important historical observation in that you had to have time to train with TWC and maybe even a teacher to be good at it. It was far easier to train to use weapons 1H or a basic passive shield and weapon combo and most did so as they had other things they needed to learn.
I do not know but do the majority of TWC combat besides shield and 1H weapon, come when they had schools to train people or in the military where others had such training?
MDC
Marc R:
Split off the tangent on feint raised above:
http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=10633.0
Generally, it seems in the real world TWC was used either in the "Full DB left hand/full OB right hand" way, which the rules specifically stop, for good reason since it abuses the way RM combat works as a simulation. . .or it was used as a way to expand the potential for feinting, since the defender not only has to cover all possible motions of one weapon, but two possible vectors for attack. That said, in the end, only one opening comes up, and only one blow is struck with one weapon.
There are issues with getting too detailed in breaking out what you're doing during a melee attack, which makes me wonder if the idea of "TWC makes it harder for the defender to cover" isn't already in the system, essentially the parry rules for two handed weapons.
Say something like:
Both weapons use the TWC skill or the lower of the two skills (depending on which version of RM you're using).
VS Two foes
-20 to skill, TWC attacker must declare which weapon is directed to which foe, resolve as normal. Parry DB is gained in full vs both foes. (Or perhaps split, or raise the -20 penalty).
VS One attacker.
Declare the OB/DB split as normal from this skill, the TWC attacker only gets this parry DB once, not doubled
Any parry DB declared by a single target of TWC is halved to reflect the increased difficulty of covering two potential attacks.
If the two weapons differ in any way, when rolling the attack, an odd UM attack roll means the primary hand weapon is making the attack, an even UM attack roll means the secondary weapon is making the attack.
Reflects the fact TWC is harder to parry using a mechanism already in use for another context, and also the fact that the TWC attacker is using two weapons in order to increase their number of openings, but still only exploiting the best one that comes up, not making two attacks per declaration.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page