Dual wielding?

[Michebugio]

Might I suggest Determination, if you go for a Mastery (i.e. virtue not tied to any culture, which all have one word names)?

I was thinking about a more straightforward Ambidexterity, actually. Does it sound too much D&Dish?

[Stormcrow]

I was thinking about a more straightforward Ambidexterity, actually. Does it sound too much D&Dish?

Frankly, yes. Ambidexterity is uncommon, but allow it in a game and everyone will have it. And realistically, it doesn't allow you to attack twice or with two weapons; it just lets you attack with either your left or your right hand just as well as with the other.

With true dual-weapon use, one weapon is always used in a supporting role, and only the other is used to attack. So a sword may be used to parry while a dagger is used to attack. Or an axe may be used to hook the opponent's shield while another axe is used to attack.

But the modern gamer's obsession with wielding two weapons—and it is an obsession—mostly comes from movies and games trying to make their characters look bad-ass. It has nothing to do with real-world fighting techniques. Unfortunately, many gamers get their historical backgrounds straight out of the very movies and games they're copying, and have no idea they're not being realistic.

[Glorelendil]

Too bad Fell-handed is taken.

[Valarian]

I was thinking about a more straightforward Ambidexterity, actually. Does it sound too much D&Dish?

With true dual-weapon use, one weapon is always used in a supporting role, and only the other is used to attack. So a sword may be used to parry while a dagger is used to attack. Or an axe may be used to hook the opponent's shield while another axe is used to attack.

This. Dual weapons should never give an extra attack. Ambidexterity only means that you would be able to use either hand equally well and, as Stormcrow says, one weapon is used to defend while the other attacks. Where this gives an advantage is that the opponent never knows which hand will be the defence and which the attack. Even with an aggressive strike (forward stance), one weapon may be used as a feint (expecting a parry) while the other used to strike.

[Glorelendil]

Valarian's comment about your opponent not knowing where the attack is coming from suggests an idea: dual-wielding (however it is "learned") could grant Advantage (q.v.) on the attack roll. The problem is that you'd have to determine which weapon hits, if the weapons are different, and adding an extra die roll feels un-TOR-like.

Could work great if you were using two of the same weapon, though.

[Falenthal]

Francesco is making me feel uncomfortable...

He's always a step ahead of us

By the way, I think that I'm finally letting one of my players to use a dagger in his off-hand. At the price of a (still unnamed) Virtue, on a great or extraordinary success with his main weapon he can attempt an attack with the dagger against the same opponent by spending a point of Hope. I think I'm letting him do that only with daggers and short swords, however.

Case closed, for me

If the adversaries' Special Ability is called "Savage Assault", the heroes' Mastery could be "Bold Assault".

[Michebugio]

Frankly, yes. Ambidexterity is uncommon, but allow it in a game and everyone will have it. And realistically, it doesn't allow you to attack twice or with two weapons; it just lets you attack with either your left or your right hand just as well as with the other.

With true dual-weapon use, one weapon is always used in a supporting role, and only the other is used to attack. So a sword may be used to parry while a dagger is used to attack. Or an axe may be used to hook the opponent's shield while another axe is used to attack.

This. Dual weapons should never give an extra attack. Ambidexterity only means that you would be able to use either hand equally well and, as Stormcrow says, one weapon is used to defend while the other attacks. Where this gives an advantage is that the opponent never knows which hand will be the defence and which the attack. Even with an aggressive strike (forward stance), one weapon may be used as a feint (expecting a parry) while the other used to strike.

You both made a point, definitely. Also I totally agree on the part regarding actual two-weapon fighting, so Ambidexterity may not suit well this ability.

In this case, however, I don't want a real "double-wielding" in my games, something that comes more from games than from reality. I just find interesting to open a possibility to players who want a generic combat advantage when wielding another weapon (i.e. a dagger) in their off-hand, be it a feint, an unexpected attack or a shield hook.

Savage Assault seems to describe well this possibility in terms of game mechanics. Combat rounds don't keep track of individual swings, so an extra attack may be simply considered a second effective attack beyond the first, because the character has found an extra opening in his opponent's guard thanks to a feint with his off-hand dagger. A hint for this is also the fact that the extra attack must be made against the same target as the first.

So if limited to the use of a dagger, it may be Dagger Assault: this would require also some training (Experience cost) in Dagger to be really useful, something that is not frequently seen among TOR characters. Or Bold Assault as Falenthal suggests, opening it also to other, heavier weapons. Or Dual/Double Assault, and so on.

[zedturtle]

Yeah, I was coming in to say much the same thing... a combat round is much more than just a single strike. Plus, spending Hope to have the possibility (not certainty) of additional damage is not too unlike Savage Assault or Shield Fighting (which doesn't have the Hope cost, but does not scale with the character's experience level either).

[Michebugio]

Oh and I realized that also Oderic from Kinstrife and Dark Tidings (Tales from the Wilderland, page 60) is dual wielding: sword, axe as a secondary weapon, Savage Assault. Should the players fight him, he would attack with both weapons in a round if he scores a Tengwar with his sword (on a called shot of his axe as a secondary attack, it would look exactly like a shield hook maneuver).

So it can be done also with heavier weapons, then! And he's not completely a bad guy, so it can be done by heroes too...

It will be definitely a Mastery in my game (so not Cultural). But I still need a name...

[doctheweasel]

Maybe that could be a satisfactory house rule. Wielding two weapons allows for a special Called Shot to do extra damage equal to the off-hand weapon's damage rating.