FinalHavenLarp.com

This regards the stacking of two skills: Dual Wield (and Florentine, since they are identical) and Use Shield.

In nearly every other case, doubly investing in a skill (resists, Escape Artist, Ambidexterity, Use Bow, etc.) grants some kind of bonus. Dual Wield and Use Shield are two glaring exceptions to this.

I submit that investing in two ranks of Dual Wield should allow a player to use two Long weapons - one category longer than currently allowed. This means that players who spend 40 points may now two-weapon-fight with twin longswords, rather than one long and one short. This seems neither unbalanced nor impractical.

As for Use Shield, perhaps a lesser version of the Dwarven discipline's Shield ability. Two ranks of Use Shield could add 50% to the damage a shield can take before shattering.

Thoughts?

I like it.

some skills were just not meant to stack at all or more then a certain number of times.

the reason behind the short size restriction on duel wield is a safety one, and I don't think it needs a buff anyway.
the reason behind use shield not stacking was that there is none it just doesn't

I actually brought up the same argument about shields not so long ago
http://www.finalhavenlarp.com/phpBB2/vi ... =13&t=6023
decent discussion but no progress or changes

i am all for little improvements (i don't think duel wield needs a buff, and rogues by proxy) but i would prefer some other problems get fixed before we go adding things (rogues for instance)

As far as milti "use shield" goes, I think two buys should be worth something. I would suggest maybe a resist shatter or parry with a long cool down so its usable once a combat, or even once per event. Alternates would be resist press / low number(no more than 5) KO to represent a shield bash
Three buys is currently only possible if your an orc warrior/healer/sage with either the guardian or defender level 1 discipline... OR....if your a warrior/healer/sage with either the guardian or defender level 1 discipline and you use the cross training perk to buy the level 1 use shield form the other discipline.
Should a PC go that route, I dont think mimicing the durable or composite exotic item benefits its too crazy, and giving the shield a total of 19 if they have 3 USE SHIELD skills and a durable shield item (34 if they have SHIELD skill as well)


As for Dual Wield, two long weapons is only VERY rarely mastered by real and historical warriors, so I feel that a different bonus is more in line.
Id say something like the ability to nullify an attack, and then strike an attacker with the exact same attack that the dual wielder was just hit with. Again with a long cool down so its once per combat at best.

But duel wielding two long swords is fun and I like things that are fun.

Ark wrote:some skills were just not meant to stack at all or more then a certain number of times.

the reason behind the short size restriction on duel wield is a safety one, and I don't think it needs a buff anyway.
the reason behind use shield not stacking was that there is none it just doesn't

<snip>

i am all for little improvements (i don't think duel wield needs a buff, and rogues by proxy) but i would prefer some other problems get fixed before we go adding things (rogues for instance)

I don't see why it would be a safety issue. Having a second weapon of equal length might actually reduce swing velocity, to keep the blades from getting tangled up. The "rouges are over-powdered" argument should be handled elsewhere; this is simply about the dual-wielding skill.

Kaylan Chargeender wrote:As for Dual Wield, two long weapons is only VERY rarely mastered by real and historical warriors, so I feel that a different bonus is more in line.
Id say something like the ability to nullify an attack, and then strike an attacker with the exact same attack that the dual wielder was just hit with. Again with a long cool down so its once per combat at best.

Can you provide a source for this? My own martial arts practice (and Kali/silat philosophy in particular) suggest the exact opposite; two weapons of equal length, whether long or short, is considered the ideal. This way, no hand is favored over the other, and the fighters are trained to become ambidextrous.

In my experience, the only fighting style which agrees with your perspective is classical Italianate light-blade fencing, and with good reason; one cannot fight "side-face" with two equal blades.

In either case, the rarity you mentioned is reflected in spending the extra 20 points to buy dual-wield again. It would be, by build availability, quite rare.

notsabbat
But duel wielding two long swords is fun and I like things that are fun.

So is dual wielding two electric mini guns, but its neither realistic nor is it LARP safe.

Zandron
I don't see why it would be a safety issue. Having a second weapon of equal length might actually reduce swing velocity, to keep the blades from getting tangled up.

Not sure how you think having weapons that are a few inches longer reduces anything with LARP weapons, but it doesnt. In fact it tends to make players swing harder due to the wider attack arc, and with less control because they are using a weapon one handed.
The simple facts are the shorter the weapon, the lighter the weapon and there fore the easier the weapon become to control safely.

Can you provide a source for this?

Uhm...history? The only swordsman that I have ever heard of, that was ever credited to actually using two long blades in REAL combat was Miyamoto Musashi. It also took him a magnitude longer to learn to do so than 20 skill points represents.

My own martial arts practice (and Kali/silat philosophy in particular) suggest the exact opposite; two weapons of equal length, whether long or short, is considered the ideal. This way, no hand is favored over the other,

Then I suggest re evaluating your paradigm about what a long weapon is, and inspecting Kali/silat since they dont use what would be considered a long weapon unless its with both hands.

and the fighters are trained to become ambidextrous.

Right, which means they can use EITHER hand with equal skill....not BOTH hands.

In my experience, the only fighting style which agrees with your perspective is classical Italianate light-blade fencing, and with good reason; one cannot fight "side-face" with two equal blades.

...and kenjutsu, which teaches a long(katana) and short(wakizashi) on the rare occasions a samurai would use two weapons, and the Apache style that always used a shorter off hand weapon(most often a hooked knife/dagger in the off hand), and the Britonian style the knights used...who would also rarely use a second weapon, but were trained to use a shorter flail/hammer/mace in the off hand if the shield became unusable.
So your right, just the one style...

In either case, the rarity you mentioned is reflected in spending the extra 20 points to buy dual-wield again. It would be, by build availability, quite rare.

Yes it would be rare, because the rules limit who can get it. I meant rare as in most humans cant effectively do it even when trained to do so. 20 skill points doesnt even BEGIN to represent that kind of rarity.

Brian already covered most of what I wanted to say and more then covered the historical aspect of twin weapon fighting.

the only addition I will make is simply a larp combat one.
-the bigger the weapon the more unwieldy.
-duel wielding big weapons is in fact a safety risk as you have less control with one hand on a more unwieldy weapon.
-duel wield needs no buff whatsoever, its already plenty strong and needs no boost simply because

there are three main melee combat styles in FH
1 long weapon
2 short weapons
sword and board

pretty much choose the one that fits your character ^_^

Celtics also dual wielded, as did many Latin America machete artists, and don't forget the Shaolin monk's dual hook blades, which is the best real example of two full sized sword fighting that I can think of.

Perhaps two FULL SIZED one handed swords is a little bit ridiculous, maybe a median of the short blade and the one-handed blade? If "realism" is your goal than that helps it get a little bit bigger to full sized dual wielding tactics, I think anyone who is untrained will become messy and dangerous with two full sized blades. So, we can't give trained people special benefits, so can we find the middle ground?

Commenting on the "realism" of only spending 20 points on becoming a master dual wielder; in real life there aren't only three combat styles :p, you guys have to decide which is more valuable keeping it real or not. Realistically speaking twenty points can buy you a lot of things that don't compare in real life. Not to mention MAGIC. Now, I've argued both realism and non-realism in this post, because I think both have a place here.

On the topic of "dual swords being OP" it all depends on the person wielding them, and the situation that they are in. Don't make that argument unless you are going to bring up bows and shields, because ANYTHING compared to the two handed weapon style is going to be better, even if the one handed person is swinging for 3's.

I think something should be made for the dual wielders and the shield users merely because everyone else gets something. The "there just isn't one" argument is slightly faulty, as why that's the reason he brought it up. It is his belief that there SHOULD be one.

On the topic of aerodynamics...wut...a larger weapon will OF COURSE create more air resistance. The player swinging harder should be put on the stupidity of the player and not on the size and lightness of the weapon, as someone who had a lot of trouble "checking his blows" in the first event I can tell you that a quick talk with a GM can solve a player's inexperience with fighting and safety. Especially when, like me, they are more used to throwing a discus or sparing in karate than fighting in a "larp safe" environment.

Kaylan, I liked some of your ideas about making the bonuses less about the actually sizes of the weapons, but giving the player an in game ability. As long as it is fair and cool I think there could be some good idea from that. I'm not itching for people to have bigger shields, even though I use one.

I think maybe a solution would be a play test? Perhaps give Zondron something to work with and if people really do get hurt then he can't do it? In any case nothing will come of a bunch of people getting riled up about it, let's look for a middle ground.

no extra bonus is needed, nor should one be implemented "just because"

people can only use 1 weapon effectively, you pay a tiny 20 points for the huge advantage of two weapons or a shield and a sword. it does not matter what anyone or anything can do in real life. this is a larp, larps have rules to bring everyone on as even a footing as possible

the one bonus I could think of for twin weapons that does not actually increase damage would be: if you have this skill twice, you gain +1 (or 2) combat reflexes as twin weapon defense.
I would not consider anything stronger or remotely offensive as a 20 point bonus on top of wielding two weapons.

this is a larp, larps have rules to bring everyone on as even a footing as possible

I DETESTE this arguemnt, because if thats the case I would like a skill to quad wield the main guns from a battle ship, because it isnt real life so why the hell not make rules that make no sense what so ever right?

Unrealistic is unrealistic, and should hevily influence rules even in a LARP or you end up with FInal Fantasy crap which would be only slightly less revolting that if we just had everyone carring lap tops with gaming joysticks and just read AT each other what was on out LARP screen...

I do like the extra CBR for dual weild twice though.

I agreed with Ark, I need asprin and a drink...

no don't worry you disagreed with me more then you agreed with me in that post, so you should be okay ^_^

room is spinning....SPINNING.... Aunty EM...Aunty EM....