A hero must first diverge & advance a specific Weapon Skill from his Cultural Weapon Skill before he can take Expertise and favour the skill.

What happens when a hero continues to advance his Cultural Weapon Skill after this?

I assume that if the Cultural Weapon Skill advances higher than a diverged favoured Weapon skill in the same category, the favoured skill automatically increases along with the Cultural Weapon Skill value.

I would say that this does not happen, as in my book that is a clear case of min/maxing and powergaming...however to each their own.

There is nothing in the rules to support your thought at any rate...

I would have no problem with this.

Let's say a player have (Swords) 2, and then Specialize so he gets Longsword 2.

If the player wanted to Raise his Cultural skill of (Swords) to 3 after that... so what?

Every time the player used a Longsword he would simply have to chose what skill to use. 3 or 2... Player's call.

That's my take on it.

/wolf

You'd have to be very perverse to make this happen.

First, a character with (Swords) 2 will need to spend 6 xp to break out a Long sword 2 skill at level 3. You can't start a favoured weapon skill at the same level as the cultural weapons skill: the latter provides the basis to which you're adding the xp. (At least that's how I read "starting from the proficiency level of the Cultural weapon skill" on p. 179 of the AB.)

You would then need to spend 6 more xp to raise (Swords) to 3, and then 10 xp to raise (Swords) to 4. So you've spent 22 xp to create this little corner case . . .

. . . when you could have just spent 16 xp to get your Long sword to 4.

Put another way, why on earth would want anyone really want to do this? 9 times out of 10 you're going to have a Long sword handy--it won't make a difference if your Short sword and Sword skills are lagging behind at 2. And if for some reason you do lose your Long sword, well, you've got some good motivation to get it back or acquire a replacement.

You've basically hit the nail on the head, Maltese. I'm more in tune with your line of thinking.

The Reward and Virtue system (which heroes will assuredly be dipping into by the time this scenario becomes relevant) basically discourages a use of Cultural Weapon Skill anyway. The heroes are going to have a weapon that is an extension of their character, and I, as the LM, am discouraged from separating a hero from this item (rightly so). The scenario is almost moot (hence why it was probably never broached during play-test).

I realize that this is a possible (and unlikely) scenario that I will encounter with player-heroes, but still the rules didn't seem to address it in any fashion. So I became curious how others would interpret a scenario that has no hard rules supporting a decision in either direction.

Basically, I was also curious how others are interpreting the game design. I try to get a feel for what a designer intends as opposed to just sticking with what they've written. Keeps me open and flexible.

So I guess the bottom line is, I'd let one of my players do it, but I think it will rarely happen as it is quite expensive even if the player gets an early start on it. It'll just be worse for them the longer it's held off.

To help encourage the versatility, I might even slip a (sword) 2/ Long sword 3 hero a sweet quality short sword just to be cruel, and to see if I can get him to favour a second sword as well. I might give the player some small pay-off like his own custom dual-wielding rules, unless such rules have been developed by then.

So you are going to make him, after spending experience to break out Long Sword and then spending a Virtue to make it favoured, spend more experience to break out Short Sword and another Virtue to make it favoured as well? And all by going outside the Rewards system and tempting me with an uber item that wouldn't even be connected to my character, and thusly could be taken from me by the plot?

I would not be happy with you as a Player.

You don't have to break out the second time... the option is yours.

I also have this shiney ring I found. Care to wear it?

Giving it some thought, I might actually make such dual-wielding rules a quality of the found weapon itself, rather than create entire rules from scratch. This would have the added benefit of making the weapon seem intended for use in the off-hand (much like a main gauche), rather than a simple quality short blade to be passed to your company hobbit.

I'd play around with the rules for just such a short sword (dagger, or perhaps axe), something such as:

If attacking with another weapon, you may spend a Hope point to immediately make a second attack using this short sword. If you have short sword as a favoured Weapon Skill, and rolled a Gandalf Rune while rolling to hit with your first attack this round, you needn't spend the Hope point to activate this ability. This ability may only be used once per round.

Something like this might help to keep Cultural Weapon Skills viable toward the late game if such a weapon was used in conjunction with a long sword by a Barding.

I may even go so far as to add a further inherent quality: While you wield another weapon with this short sword, add +1 to your Parry score. If you have short sword as a favoured Weapon Skill, add +2 to your Parry score instead.

To keep rumblings in check such as those above, you can also remind players that they may add their own Reward options to the weapon if they're overly concerned about plot immunity and your whimsical Loremaster stylings. Not that this item wouldn't be considered akin to a Cultural Reward to begin with.

Bah, I'm too idle! I need my books to arrive so I can start running.

I think GhostWolf69 hit it on the head. You get all swords at 3, but if you want the opportunity to use Hope you have to swing the Long Sword with 2.

Again, I think the rules are quite clear that you cannot breakout an individual weapons skill at the same value as the cultural weapons skill you've taken it from. You can't get Sword 2 from (Swords) 2; you need to take Sword 3.

Agreed. The Rules give little support for that... But honestly... Who cares? If the player wants to spend his XP, to gain an Expertise Virtue, breaking out Long Sword 2, from (Swords) 2... I'm not going to argue.

My interpretation of the rules on AB page 171:

This whole paragraph to me is just to Emphasise that you can never have (Swords) 2.

That's the way I play it.

/wolf