Dual Wielding

[Valarian]

Dual-wielding implies a higher than normal level of weapon training and is as much (or more) about defense as it is about offense. The secondary weapon would be used mostly to parry--only attacking when an especially good opportunity presents itself (say, when one's primary weapon is locked with the weapon of one's opponent). A possible template exists in the Cultural Virtue of Shield-fighting for the Culture Men of the Lake.

I'd go with more. It's possible, easier with a degree of ambidexterity, but by no means easy to coordinate. Dual wielding a secondaryweapin is an active defence - like a buckler. It lacks the passive defence capability of a shield. Concentration must be split between the attack and defence. Feint with primary and attack with secondary or use secondary as the defence.

[Otaku-sempai]

We seem to be on the same page, Valarian. I might add that, if not abused, Dual-wielding need not be an abomination, but simply another fighting style, one best suited to specialized fighters such as lighly-armored duelists or highly-trained gladiators. That said, D&D illustrates how easily Dual-wielding can be abused.

[Glorelendil]

We have a dual-wielder in our online group. The game that Hermes Serpent is running, no less. "How can this be?" you ask.

Simple: "It has the exact same stats as a buckler, but it looks like an axe."

Roleplaying to the rescue!

There are only two reasons to want to dual wield: power, or narrative. If you want the narrative, then the above solution works perfectly. If you want power, start with the above, then spend all your XP on improving your damage (increasing weapon skill, taking Fell-handed, adding qualities to your weapon, etc.) and then describe the extra damage as coming from your offhand weapon.

See? TOR already supports dual-wielding.

P.S. If, however, you just want more power than your pathetic single-weapon-wielding companions, you're S.O.L.

[Hermes Serpent]

Damn, he's giving away all my secrets!

[Stormcrow]

The idea of wielding two weapons is not ridiculous, but many D&Disms, like that Drizzt fellow, are unrealistic and foolish. Here are my first thoughts on sensibly using two weapons.

First, the secondary weapon must be small. No longswords in the off-hand, thank you! The purpose of the secondary weapon is defense, mostly, plus opportunistic stabbing or disarming if close combat gets very close. In One Ring terms, only the following weapons are appropriate: axe, short sword, dagger.

The main purpose of a secondary weapon is defense. In lieu of a shield, a secondary weapon will grant a Parry bonus of +1. Using a weapon in the off-hand is usually less encumbering than carrying a shield.

A fighter using a secondary weapon also has special options when making Called Shots. When attacking normally, the skill to roll against is that of the primary weapon, but when making a called shot one can choose to do so with either the primary or secondary weapon. If primary, use the normal rules and keep the Parry bonus. If secondary, the fighter must succeed on a roll against the secondary weapon skill with at least TWO Success icons, and gets special Secondary Weapon Called Shot effects:

DAGGER, SHORT SWORD: The attack results in a Piercing Blow regardless of the outcome of the Feat Die.
AXE: The target drops his weapon.

Furthermore, on the round following this one, a fighter who made a Called Shot with a secondary weapon loses the Parry bonus it grants, as the weapon was being used offensively instead of defensively.

[JoeArcher]

We have a dual-wielder in our online group. The game that Hermes Serpent is running, no less. "How can this be?" you ask.

Simple: "It has the exact same stats as a buckler, but it looks like an axe."

Roleplaying to the rescue!

There are only two reasons to want to dual wield: power, or narrative. If you want the narrative, then the above solution works perfectly. If you want power, start with the above, then spend all your XP on improving your damage (increasing weapon skill, taking Fell-handed, adding qualities to your weapon, etc.) and then describe the extra damage as coming from your offhand weapon.

See? TOR already supports dual-wielding.

P.S. If, however, you just want more power than your pathetic single-weapon-wielding companions, you're S.O.L.

That's actually a brilliant way of handling it!

[EPenna]

We have a dual-wielder in our online group. The game that Hermes Serpent is running, no less. "How can this be?" you ask.

Simple: "It has the exact same stats as a buckler, but it looks like an axe."

Roleplaying to the rescue!

There are only two reasons to want to dual wield: power, or narrative. If you want the narrative, then the above solution works perfectly. If you want power, start with the above, then spend all your XP on improving your damage (increasing weapon skill, taking Fell-handed, adding qualities to your weapon, etc.) and then describe the extra damage as coming from your offhand weapon.

See? TOR already supports dual-wielding.

P.S. If, however, you just want more power than your pathetic single-weapon-wielding companions, you're S.O.L.

Not really. I mean, re-skinning like you guys did is a perfectly valid solution, but sometimes it's nice if different narrative options have different mechanical interpretations. One very basic example of that is different weapons stats in TOR: you could easily have almost all one-weapons have the same stats (like WFRP 1e/2e does, for instance), but the game chose to differentiate them by giving them different Edge and Injury values, and different Called Shots.

So wanting some kind of dual-wielding rules doesn't automatically qualify one as a powergamer interested only in combat: it's perfectly valid to be interested in the narrative side of things while still wanting different aspects to be represented by different, specific mechanics, not just re-skinning (which, again, is a perfectly fine way to do this, just not the only one).

[zedturtle]

That's a good solution. But I wonder if just using Shield-Fighting as a template wouldn't be better. If you rule that the weapon must be Encumbrance 1 and only does it's basic damage (because you're only rolling the Feat die and hitting on 8+, so no chance for Great or Extraordinary results); you'd probably do less damage that most people who are doing shield bashes.

I'd keep the +1 to Parry for the whole time... keeping track of it is more trouble than it's worth and a brawny Laketowner can do more damage with a Buckler anyways.

[poosticks7]

Would this +1 parry apply to ranged attacks?

Just wondering.

[zedturtle]

Would this +1 parry apply to ranged attacks?

Just wondering.

It's just a realistic as a buckler affecting ranged attacks. (That is to say, not very realistic at all, but small potatoes in the grand scheme of everything).

I also meant to say earlier that all the weapons and abilities that negate the shield bonus to parry should also negate the off-hand weapon parry bonus.