Two weapons vs one weapon

Just got your book, can't find a copy, have a cool adventure idea or story? Chat about it here.

Moderators: PEG Jodi, The Moderators

Message
Author
User avatar
Zadmar
Legendary
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:59 am
Location: Munich
Contact:

Two weapons vs one weapon

#1 Postby Zadmar » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:36 am

This subject has been mentioned before (eg here and here), but now that I've tested it out quite a bit with my group, I thought it'd be worth starting new thread.

It's been pointed out on a few occasions that Two-Fisted is a very strong edge, and that two-handed weapon users have a bit of a rough deal. This isn't necessarily the deal-breaker that some people make out, as there are enough build options in SW to support a wide range of viable builds, but the introduction of Rapid Attack in SWD comes very close to giving single-weapon fighters their own alternative to the Ambidextrous Two-Fisted Improved Frenzy combat monster. I'm a tinkerer at heart, and can't resist giving the concept that final push...

New Combat Rule

Untrained Fighter: You may temporarily gain the benefits of Frenzy or Sweep for the round, but without the appropriate edge you suffer -2 Parry until the beginning of your next turn.

Modified Edges

Frenzy: This is now a Novice edge, although it cannot be combined with Two Weapons until you reach Seasoned rank. It can now be used for both Fighting and Throwing attacks.

Improved Frenzy: This now a Novice edge, although once again it cannot be combined with Two Weapons until you reach Seasoned rank. As well as removing the -2 MAP from Frenzy, it also reduces the attack penalty of Rapid Attack to -2 when used for Fighting or Throwing.

New Edges

Rapid Frenzy: New Seasoned edge, requires Improved Frenzy. You no longer suffer -2 Parry when using Rapid Attack for Fighting or Throwing.

Improved Rapid Frenzy: New Seasoned edge, requires Rapid Frenzy. You no longer suffer any penalties when using Rapid Attack for Fighting or Throwing.

Summary

For the character who wants to focus on multiple attacks, there are now two routes:

Two-Weapon: Novice: Ambidextrous and Two-Fisted. Seasoned: Frenzy and Improved Frenzy.
One-Weapon: Novice: Frenzy and Improved Frenzy. Seasoned: Rapid Frenzy and Improved Rapid Frenzy.

Or to break it down by advance:

0 advances:

Two-Weapon: Two attacks at -2/-4 (MAP and offhand penalty)
One-Weapon: Two attacks at -2/-2, with -2 Parry (using untrained Frenzy)

1 advance:

Two-Weapon: Two attacks at -2/-2 (added Ambidextrous)
One-Weapon: Two attacks at -2/-2 (added Frenzy)

2 advances:

Two-Weapon: Two attacks at -0/-0 (added Two-Fisted)
One-Weapon: Two attacks at -0/-0 (added Improved Frenzy)

Two-Weapon: Three attacks at -2/-2/-2, with -2 Parry (using untrained Frenzy)
One-Weapon: Three attacks at -2/-2/-2, with -2 Parry (using Rapid Attack)

3 advances:

Two-Weapon: Three attacks at -2/-2/-2 (added Frenzy)
One-Weapon: Three attacks at -2/-2/-2 (added Rapid Frenzy)

4 advances:

Two-Weapon: Three attacks at -0/-0/-0 (added Improved Frenzy)
One-Weapon: Three attacks at -0/-0/-0 (added Improved Rapid Frenzy)

Two-Fisted still has the advantage of two independent hands - that means they get a wild die with each hand, and need to be disarmed twice to lose both weapons. But overall the two alternatives are pretty closely matched, and they can both attack up to three opponents per round.

I've been using this solution in my campaign, one player with paired weapons the other with a two-handed weapon, and it works well.


EDIT: If you're using the weapons from the core rules, I strongly recommend treating shields as weapons for the purposes of Frenzy, Improved Frenzy and Rapid Attack. Otherwise sword and board will become grossly overpowered.

User avatar
JamesG
Seasoned
Posts: 157
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2012 12:12 pm
Location: Northern Ocean County, NJ

Re: Two weapons vs one weapon

#2 Postby JamesG » Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:31 pm

Zadmar wrote:Two-Fisted still has the advantage of two independent hands - that means they get a wild die with each hand, and need to be disarmed twice to lose both weapons. But overall the two alternatives are pretty closely matched, and they can both attack up to three opponents per round.


I was thinking the 2 Handed weapon had the advantage of higher damaging attacks. Perhaps that balances out the 2 Fisted advantages you noted?

User avatar
Zadmar
Legendary
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:59 am
Location: Munich
Contact:

#3 Postby Zadmar » Thu Aug 23, 2012 2:14 pm

Nope, the Parry penalty more than offsets the higher damage. Take two characters with Strength d10, Vigor d8 and Fighting d8, give one a longsword and the other a greatsword:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 60090 of them, while Greatsword won 39910.

And the longsword guy still has a hand free. Give him a rapier for his off hand (even if he's not actually attacking with it) and we get:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 70145 of them, while Greatsword won 29855.

Introduce Two-Fisted and the fights get even more skewed.

ogbendog
Legendary
Posts: 2652
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:55 am

#4 Postby ogbendog » Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:03 pm

if you add armor or raise toughness, does the advantage shift?

User avatar
Zadmar
Legendary
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:59 am
Location: Munich
Contact:

#5 Postby Zadmar » Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:14 pm

A little. If I give them both Vigor d12 and armour 3:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 56494 of them, while Greatsword won 43506.

There were 100000 fights. Longsword+Rapier won 67085 of them, while Greatsword won 32915.

Jonah Hex
Veteran
Posts: 800
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 10:41 pm
Location: Saskatoon, SK

#6 Postby Jonah Hex » Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:40 pm

Interesting comparison. Have you run the numbers for longsword + shield vs. longsword and vs. Greatsword?
Playing GURPS Victorian Monster Hunters
Playing/running D&D 5e Encounters

ValhallaGH
Legendary
Posts: 6412
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:15 pm

#7 Postby ValhallaGH » Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:23 pm

Jonah Hex wrote:Interesting comparison. Have you run the numbers for longsword + shield vs. longsword and vs. Greatsword?

They'd be the same as for Longsword + (defensive) rapier versus X. Unless you used a Large Shield, when the numbers would be even more skewed in favor of the one-handed weapon.
"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher."
"Not against a Servitor."
"... We're all gonna die."

User avatar
Takeda
Heroic
Posts: 1443
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 9:05 pm

#8 Postby Takeda » Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:26 am

It's seemed to me for a long time there was really no point to wielding a two-handed weapon in SW the way it's applied.

Personally I feel that you can wield a weapon as if you were +1 Die Type Strength if you wield it two-handed ... unless it's designed to be wielded two-handed.

So if you wield a Longsword (damage) D8 thus D8 Strength required you can do it with one-hand with D8 Strength, D6 Strength two-handed or D6 Strength one-handed at the standard -1 Attack.

It would seem to me that if you wanted to you could let the user of a 1-handed weapon wielding it with two hands to wield it (damage) as if they had +1 die-type not only to determine IF they could wield it but the effective Strength (Damage) as well.

So as an example. If you have D6 strength you can wield a Longsword doing 2d8 damage if you wield it two-handed. You can do 1d6+1d8 at -1 Fighting 1-handed. You could wield a Shortsword for 2d6 damage one-handed or 1d8 (effective Str)+1d6 (weapon damage) two-handed.

I could see that any weapon not made to accomodate being wielded in two-hands would be harder to wield imposing a -1 Parry ... but check out a extra-long-handled Longsword ... only needs to be about 2.5"-3" longer which shouldn't destroy the balance when wielded one-handed.

I'll shut up now ... stream of consciousness is getting messy!
Dean: "Ya' know she could be faking."
Sam: "Yeah, what do you wanna do, poke her with a stick?"
[Dean nods]
Sam: "Dude, you're not gonna poke her with a stick?"
Supernatural Quotes

User avatar
Zadmar
Legendary
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:59 am
Location: Munich
Contact:

#9 Postby Zadmar » Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:25 am

Takeda wrote:It's seemed to me for a long time there was really no point to wielding a two-handed weapon in SW the way it's applied.

To be fair, I should point out that the spear is a decent weapon, particularly for a character with Strength d6. It's as effective as using a shortsword and small/medium shield, but lighter, cheaper, can be thrown, and (perhaps most importantly) it also gives 1" reach, which excels for one-on-one combat when used in combination with First Strike.

Takeda wrote:Personally I feel that you can wield a weapon as if you were +1 Die Type Strength if you wield it two-handed ... unless it's designed to be wielded two-handed.

That's an excellent house rule, and I also use it myself, but right now I'm more focused on making two-handed weapons more appealing.

I didn't mean to turn this into another comparison of weapon types, I was just pointing out that the higher damage die of the greatsword is not even enough to compensate for its Parry penalty, let alone the fact that it requires two hands and prevents you from using Two Fisted.

SWD introduced Rapid Attack which at first glance I didn't like, but which I've since come to appreciate. The fact that it doesn't work with two weapons means that there's already a mechanism in place for one weapon to achieve the same number of attacks as two weapons. With a little tweaking it can be turned into a set of edges that provide a viable alternative to Two Fisted.

grufflehead
Novice
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:18 am

#10 Postby grufflehead » Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:40 am

Well, well, the phrase 'viable build' rears its ugly head. Thanks for reminding me WHY I ditched D20 games and their CharOp mindset and came to a decent system like SW in the first place.

User avatar
Zadmar
Legendary
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:59 am
Location: Munich
Contact:

#11 Postby Zadmar » Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:18 am

grufflehead wrote:Well, well, the phrase 'viable build' rears its ugly head. Thanks for reminding me WHY I ditched D20 games and their CharOp mindset and came to a decent system like SW in the first place.

A min-maxing mindset is often considered undesirable for players, but it's a necessary mindset for designing game mechanics. The reason why we see much less min-maxing in SW (compared to many other systems) is because it's been well designed.

The proposal I've laid out here isn't a radical change, I'm mostly just filling in a small gap between an existing rule (Rapid Attack) and two existing edges (Frenzy and Improved Frenzy). I've seen bigger changes in setting rules.

ValhallaGH
Legendary
Posts: 6412
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:15 pm

#12 Postby ValhallaGH » Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:37 am

Takeda wrote:So if you wield a Longsword (damage) D8 thus D8 Strength required you can do it ... D6 Strength one-handed at the standard -1 Attack.

That's not how it works.
If you're using a melee weapon that don't have the strength for then the damage die is reduced to match your strength, and you do not get any positive abilities of the weapon. You keep all the negatives.
For ranged weapons your damage is unchanged, but you take a -1 per die type difference on attack rolls.


Interesting house rule, though. I've got some fondness for it.
"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher."
"Not against a Servitor."
"... We're all gonna die."

ogbendog
Legendary
Posts: 2652
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:55 am

#13 Postby ogbendog » Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:24 pm

Right, this isn't about min-maxing. this is about a concept working.

Greatswords wouldn't exist if there weren't a valid reason to use them.

User avatar
Clint
Site Admin
Posts: 19197
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:28 pm

#14 Postby Clint » Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:40 pm

ogbendog wrote:Greatswords wouldn't exist if there weren't a valid reason to use them.


Speaking of which, what happens if the two opponents don't use the same tactics? The greatsword user is already taking a Parry hit for more damage, so what if he Wild Attacks? It has less impact on a lower Parry than a higher one. For that matter, what if he Wild Attacks and Rapid Attacks? Or what if he Wild Attacks to Disarm the longsword (leaving the foe with a weaker weapon in their offhand at -2 to hit).

Just saying, the system is also designed to make player tactical choices meaningful and not that X is always balanced to Y in a non-tactical simulation.
Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager

www.peginc.com

User avatar
Takeda
Heroic
Posts: 1443
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 9:05 pm

Warning! Stream of Consciousness

#15 Postby Takeda » Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:57 pm

grufflehead wrote:Well, well, the phrase 'viable build' rears its ugly head. Thanks for reminding me WHY I ditched D20 games and their CharOp mindset and came to a decent system like SW in the first place.


I totally agree! For me this is about viability of use ... not build really ...

If you were a warrior going out into the frontier to fight the foe would you take a Greatsword or a Longsword and shield?

If Greatsword, why?

If Longsword and shield, why?

If you do it for feel ... well I honestly don't think any rational warrior would take a particular weapon out into the war just because it looks cool. If it's not going to be effective it will get them killed or make them useless to their comrades and thus put them more at risk as they have to carry more of the burden of combat.

So if you have heavy armour and you're not likely to be pelted with ranged attacks and your foe can't hit that hard then Greatsword all the way.

Not many warriors will have the D10 Strength necessary though. Imagine if you will that you always do +1 Die Type Strength damage when you wield anything two-handed. Say the minimum Str to use the Greatsword is D10 that means you can do it with D8 two-handed and do damage of 2D10 .. or if you have have D10 Str already you do D12 (effective 2-handed Str)+D10 (weapon) and if you had D12 Str already you could wield it for D12+1+d10.

If any of you have seen a real Scottish Claymore or Sweihander they typically weigh between 6-8 lbs with a very long handle. Bigger and heavier ones were purely for show ... too heavy to wield in combat for more than a few swings. Tendons, ligaments, cartilage can only be so tough. An average person wielding it in two hands will do it with a penalty (their effective two-handed str will be D8), a stronger person (D8) will be able to wield it without penalty (effective two-handed Str of D10) and a truly strong person (D10+) will wield it for terrific damage as their effective Str will be D12+!

Personally the more I look at it In Real Life the shield wins almost every time in this choice unless ... the ranged weapons are puny and/or otherwise ineffective & you have heavy armour (or you're just crazy) & your foes don't hit that hard (or you're just crazy).

So this is how I'm going to do it. In my view if you're wielding a weapon that's so heavy for you that it imposes an attack penalty then the same penalty affects your Parry. If you have a weapon that's especially built for parrying it may have a bonus, if it's made to penetrate armour it gets AP but at the cost of a Die-type of typical damage. It's purpose-built to do something other than straight damage so there's a cost to this specialisation.

So let's look at the Katana for a moment with what I'm stream of consciousness'ing here. Str Min: D6, Damage D6+2, AP: 2 Wt: 2.5 (realistic weight just for comparison, not Encumbrance). It's obviously built with a handle for two-hands but it's balance is such that it can be wielded without penalty at D6 Strength. It can be wielded two-handed by a D6 Strength character and they would do D8 (effective Strength) + D6+2 (weapon) damage with AP: 2. It get's no bonus nor penalty to Parry. It also means a D4 Strength character could wield it two-handed at no penalty doing D6+D6+2 Damage AP: 2. If you've ever seen a tiny and old wielder of a sword say Iaido or Kendo it is too heavy for them one-handed but no problem at all two-handed.

IMHO it just makes sense that wielding a weapon in two hands simply hits harder than one wielded in one hand. If you want to get all generic on it then check this out.

One-handed weapon made for D4 Str with a one-handed handle.
Min Str: D4 Damage: D4 AP: - Parry: - Wt: 1 (if used two-handed -1 Attack, Str +1 die type) (-2 Notice to Conceal)

One-Handed weapon for D4 Str with a 1.5 Handed Handle.
Min Str: D4 Damage: D4 Ap: - Parry: - Wt: 1.5 (if used two-handed Str +1 Die Type) (-1 Notice to Conceal)

One-handed weapon made for D6 Str with a one-handed handle.
Min Str: D6 Damage: D6 AP: - Parry: - Wt: 2 (if used two-handed -1 Attack, Str +1 die type) (-0 Notice to Conceal)

One-Handed weapon for D6 Str with a 1.5 Handed Handle.
Min Str: D6 Damage: D6 Ap: - Parry: - Wt: 2.5 (if used two-handed Str +1 Die Type) (+1 Notice to Conceal)

One-handed weapon made for D8 Str with a one-handed handle.
Min Str: D8 Damage: D8 AP: - Parry: - Wt: 3.5 (if used two-handed -1 Attack, Str +1 die type) (+2 Notice to Conceal)

One-Handed weapon for D8 Str with a 1.5 Handed Handle.
Min Str: D8 Damage: D8 Ap: - Parry: - Wt: 4 (if used two-handed Str +1 Die Type) (+3 Notice to Conceal)

One-handed weapon made for D10 Str with a one-handed handle.
Min Str: D10 Damage: D10 AP: - Parry: - Wt: 5 (if used two-handed -1 Attack, Str +1 die type) (+4 Notice to Conceal)

One-Handed weapon for D10 Str with a 1.5 Handed Handle.
Min Str: D10 Damage: D10 Ap: - Parry: - Wt: 5.5 (if used two-handed Str +1 Die Type) (+5 Notice to Conceal)

One-handed weapon made for D12 Str with a one-handed handle.
Min Str: D12 Damage: D12 AP: - Parry: - Wt: 7 (if used two-handed -1 Attack, Str +1 die type) (+6 Notice to Conceal)

One-Handed weapon for D12 Str with a 1.5 Handed Handle.
Min Str: D12 Damage: D12 Ap: - Parry: - Wt: 7.5 (if used two-handed Str +1 Die Type) (+7 Notice to Conceal)

So for example if you were to wield this last weapon 2-handed with only D8 Strength you'd be doing D10+D10 damage at -1 Fighting and -1 Parry. If you were to wield it 2-handed at D6 Strength you'd be doing D8+D8 damage at -2 Fighting and -2 Parry.

You could certainly add in the wrinkle that if it's designed to be wielded two-handed add another +1 Notice to Conceal and .5 lbs to weight. This would give the wielder better leverage and perhaps this would mean that excess Min Str would provide a bonus of +1 Parry to the Wielder.

Now before any of you freak out I'm not debating Encumbrance. I've worn a sword and they get in the way, bump things, get caught in things and change your center of balance. Encumbrance as listed makes total sense. If you want to understand it ... anything requiring D4 is going to be light and likely small: no 'encumbrance modifier'. D6 Str Min I'd raise the weight by +1/3 to approximate Encumbrance. D8 Str I'd go +2/3 and D10+ x2 if not more.

In fact I carried a claymore on the Skytrain and Public Bus in Vancouver to take it in to be engraved and it's was very cumbersome. It only weighed in the sheath about 6.5 lbs but it encumbered like it weighed 12+ at least! In Canada a weapon like this carried in plain sight is treated like costume jewellry and unless drawn is okay in most places. I would have been wary to take it into a bank or something though ... although it could have been just a prop (no blade) ... so ... It was peace-bonded though where the blade is tied to the sheath so it can't be drawn.
Dean: "Ya' know she could be faking."

Sam: "Yeah, what do you wanna do, poke her with a stick?"

[Dean nods]

Sam: "Dude, you're not gonna poke her with a stick?"

Supernatural Quotes

FoxBlue
Seasoned
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:52 pm
Location: Fort Collins

#16 Postby FoxBlue » Fri Aug 24, 2012 8:24 pm

If Two weapon fighters need edges to be effective, why not 2 handed weapon users? Sure they need more strength but they can dump agility. I've found that in a purely melee situation, no-one messes with the great sword fighter in a defensive stance with first strike and counter strike. Your defense still isn't great but they can make you pay dearly. Assuming the attacker survives, it's wild attack time, with called shots if your into that kind of thing, or use a push chances are you're stronger, make them repeat the part where they impale themselves on your blade. In a ranged combat situation they are still terrible, but not any worse than dual weilding, plus that's the whole point of Shields so they should be better.

I also allow an edge (hold off) that gives two handed weapons reach. It makes them bad ass.[/list]
Or I'm crazy.

Drew.

ogbendog
Legendary
Posts: 2652
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:55 am

#17 Postby ogbendog » Fri Aug 24, 2012 9:08 pm

might be interesting to run that, the longsword/rapier guy (with TWF) vs the Greatsword guy with Counterattack.

User avatar
Clash957
Seasoned
Posts: 231
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 1:09 pm
Location: Tacoma, WA

#18 Postby Clash957 » Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:29 pm

FoxBlue wrote:If Two weapon fighters need edges to be effective, why not 2 handed weapon users? Sure they need more strength but they can dump agility. I've found that in a purely melee situation, no-one messes with the great sword fighter in a defensive stance with first strike and counter strike. Your defense still isn't great but they can make you pay dearly. Assuming the attacker survives, it's wild attack time, with called shots if your into that kind of thing, or use a push chances are you're stronger, make them repeat the part where they impale themselves on your blade. In a ranged combat situation they are still terrible, but not any worse than dual weilding, plus that's the whole point of Shields so they should be better.

I also allow an edge (hold off) that gives two handed weapons reach. It makes them bad ass.


Two Weapon Edges are simply there to reduce the penalties. The -1 Parry Penalty can be removed with Block. I'm not sure that Two-Weapon fighter's necessarily need any more Edges if the player understands where a two-hander is more effective in Savage Worlds.

Two-handed weapons are not the best freestyle, anything goes dueling weapons in Savage Worlds. There not, Zadmar's numbers illustrate this. These weapons weapons have specialized roles for their use unlike the genral purpose sword and shield fighters. Two-handed weapons are good at are mowing down extras, taking down big, tough monsters, and like FoxBlue shows holding ground.

If I'm playing a character with Great Axe, I'm taking the Sweep/Improved Sweep Edge. Two-handed weapons are simply the best for this Edge. I will also be Wild Attacking most of the time to ensure every single extra I whack either goes down are is at least Shaken. I will actually attempt not to engage Wild Card foes without additional party support.

The other area that two-handed weapons are better suited is against extremely tough monsters like dragons. The two-handed weapon fighter should be the focus for teamwork against high Toughness creatures. After the rest of the party gives me the best shot against the dragon (and I fairly sure the GM is low on Bennies), I'm going wait until end of round to Wild Attack and Rapid Attack and maybe even go for a called shot for a weak point. Sure that that is a -7 to my Parry. Don't matter, I'm hoping to bring 2d10+d6+6x3 (that's like 21 damage average) damage down on that beast. More if I have the Giant Killer Edge.

As for being hit, two-handed weapon fighter's rely entirely on their Toughness. Smart play like holding until near the end of the round also helps to recover Parry penalties.

As for good Edges: Sweep, Improved Sweep, and Giant Killer are all great Edges for said fighters. Conversely, two-weapon fighters would be great for a Quick, Improved Level Headed and Mighty Blow character (a character attempting to draw as many cards as possible to activate Mighty Blow).

As FoxBlue shows there are a couple tactics that keep two-handed weapons effective without changing anything. The player needs to know that two weapon fighters need to be smart with their weapon and know their role unlike the more general purpose of a sword and board fighter.

FoxBlue wrote:I also allow an edge (hold off) that gives two handed weapons reach. It makes them bad ass.


With everything I said, I do think an Edge that gives two-handed weapon Reach isn't a bad idea. The Lunge Edge from Solomon Kane would basically do that. Although, I wouldn't restrict it to just Two-handed weapons just like Lunge doesn't.
Playing: Nothing
Running: Looking to start a Savage Worlds game via Google+/Roll20.

FoxBlue
Seasoned
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:52 pm
Location: Fort Collins

#19 Postby FoxBlue » Sat Aug 25, 2012 12:22 am

I no longer allow lunge as written in my games. As soon a you add two weapon fighting or a shield it stops making sense and becomes very powerful. This was illustrated by a character in my sundered skies game who had a heavy shield, a longsword, lunge, d10 strength and first strike. It got a bit out of hand.
Or I'm crazy.



Drew.

User avatar
Zadmar
Legendary
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:59 am
Location: Munich
Contact:

#20 Postby Zadmar » Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:52 am

Sorry for the delay, I had to update my combat simulator to handle Rapid Attack and Counterattack.

Clint wrote:Speaking of which, what happens if the two opponents don't use the same tactics? The greatsword user is already taking a Parry hit for more damage, so what if he Wild Attacks? It has less impact on a lower Parry than a higher one. For that matter, what if he Wild Attacks and Rapid Attacks? Or what if he Wild Attacks to Disarm the longsword (leaving the foe with a weaker weapon in their offhand at -2 to hit).

Both characters with Strength d10, Vigor d8, Fighting d8, rest d6, both using Wild Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 54475 of them, while Greatsword won 45525.

Greatsword starts using Rapid Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 75579 of them, while Greatsword won 24421.

Now with longsword guy using a rapier (just for the parry, no extra attack):

There were 100000 fights. Longsword+Rapier won 62012 of them, while Greatsword won 37988.

And once again with greatsword guy using Rapid Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword+Rapier won 80551 of them, while Greatsword won 19449.

And with Vigor d12, armour 3, both using Wild Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 51508 of them, while Greatsword won 48492.

Greatsword starts using Rapid Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 69435 of them, while Greatsword won 30565.

Now with longsword guy using a rapier (just for the parry, no extra attack):

There were 100000 fights. Longsword+Rapier won 59641 of them, while Greatsword won 40359.

Greatsword starts using Rapid Attack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword+Rapier won 77762 of them, while Greatsword won 22238.

ogbendog wrote:might be interesting to run that, the longsword/rapier guy (with TWF) vs the Greatsword guy with Counterattack.

Longsword+Rapier with Two-Fisted vs Greatsword with Counterattack:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 76205 of them, while Greatsword won 23795.

Give them Ambidextrous and Improved Counterattack respectively:

There were 100000 fights. Longsword won 81392 of them, while Greatsword won 18608.


Return to “SW General Chat & Game Stories”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gordon and 0 guests