Question about "specialist training": One of the examples given is "twin weapons." Do you think that means…
a) Once a day, you can make an attack without a check as long as you're holding a weapon in each hand.
b) Once a day, you can make all your attacks without a check as long as you're holding a weapon in each hand.
c) All the time, you can hold a weapon in each hand just to have more options for what you use to attack (like maybe one dagger with a frost enchantment and another with a fire enchantment), and people who don't have this specialist training can't do that.
d) Something else?
Good question !
ReplyDeleteI asked myself exactly the same...
For now, I do like this :
- one per day the character can double his attacks but with a check.
A character with one attack per turn can make damage as he has two (4 if he's got 2 etc...).
- But, why not add the fact he's got a defense weapon (like a shield) and one per day he can defend with his second weapon (avoid all damage) if it's logical (you don't block a double hand hammer attack with a dagger !)
It's not like I have a system for it already (no one ever took such an ability in one of my games), but I'd do something similar to what Guillaume says:
ReplyDeleteRoll two damage dice after a successful attack.
The shield-like parry looks a tad powerful, methinks. Maybe use the weapon's damage as an armour risk die?
One other idea for double weapon combat, for character without a specialist training.
ReplyDeleteFor every one who fight with two weapons, step up the damage dice of the main weapon but fight with disadvantage if you don't have a trait which tells you are able to do this (blade dancer, assassin, fencer...)
So a short blade is d6 damage, but a short blade in each hand is d8 with disadvantage.
Of course, it's better to use a long sword d8 instead of two short blades because the damage are equal, you don't have disadvantage and you can have a shield...
But for thief, for exemple, two daggers (d4 become d6) could be good : discreet and you can throw one and still have another in your hand....
What about allow to roll damage with an advantage, but a disadvantage on the to hit roll (disadvantage mitigated by a relevant trait).
ReplyDeleteI like the idea of using your secondary blade to parry, but I need to reread the rules at this point ;)
guillaume jentey Pierre M I'm wary of giving disadvantage to attacks because you already get it a lot of the time (when fighting powerful monsters for example), so it either doesn't change anything or fucks up your rare occasions to be good at fighting.
ReplyDeleteActually, I think I'd just use your idea and rule that twin weapons step up the damage die, period. The tradeoff is simply that you have no free hand for a torch or shield.
Thanks, everybody! I think part of what confuses me is that specialist training is written as something that's activated a limited number of times per day, but the examples given feel like a mix of what you might think of as "maneuvers" (i.e., things I can totally see as activated) and more semi-permanent "states" like having twin weapons, or having a pet. (I guess having an animal companion as a specialist training means you get to have one do stuff for you all the time, but it gets to do something appropriately animal-companion-ish without a roll once a day?)
ReplyDeleteNow that we're talking about it, though, I think (hope) it's not too hard to puzzle through or think up how these work, especially if I understand correctly that it's okay to interpret mechanical effects in more than one way, even within a single game. Like, having "pet" might mean you can use it without a roll once a day to track someone or attack someone. Does that sound about right?
For me having a pet can be treated as a companion so you can ask him to do things with a roll and once per day (or more depending of your skill level) you can ask him to do a thing without a roll or a very special thing with a roll.
ReplyDeleteand Eric Nieudan I'm agree with you : the disadvantage for twin weapon is not necessary.
And now a very theoric question about twin weapon : you have a character with no fighting training (so HD d6), if he's got two short Swords (d6), he makes d8 damage. Does he have disadvantage for fighting (total damage upper than HD) or not (each weapon equal to HD) ?
I think I should give no disadvantage to allow not fighters to make d8 (but they can not have torch, shield...) and to allow big barbarians (for exemple) to make d12 damages with one big weapon in each hand...
Jason Tocci You got it right: no rule should prevent a character to do things like having a pet or a fighting style. Traits and abilities will make things easier technically.
ReplyDeleteYou job as an old school referee is to keep things moving, making rulings as you go with everyone else's consent. It can help to have a player record these rulings and make them available to everyone so that you don't have to come up with a similar solution later in your campaign.
That's why I won't write a definite rule for Drizztjutsu. I like the idea of simply stepping up the damage die, but YMMV. Not sure about going over the training maximum either. I'll decide when/if it comes up.
As guillaume jentey says, a pet is a follower. You acquire in the game, and you can direct it to do stuff even if your character sheet doesn't have anything relevant.
The golden rule for specialist abilities is: it only requires a roll if it is something that someone couldn't do otherwise. Taking a pet as an example, Distract opponent would be automatic, while Teleport to my location would require a check.
For me Specialist Training doesn't have to be once a day. As long as there is some restriction on use I'll approve it. For instance, backstabbing. I give anyone attacking from surprise advantage, but backstabbing gives double damage when the attack is successful.
ReplyDeleteEric Nieudan If you don't mind me shifting gears a bit to pick your brain on the design philosophy/process behind this, I'd love to ask: How do you decide what does need a rule and what doesn't?
ReplyDeleteExample: I've been tinkering with a hack that has a rule for dual-wielding, a rule for sword-and-shield, and a rule for two-handed weapons, as I figured, "well, you're gonna want to have stuff in your hands, and these are the three setups that almost every character will fit into." You mention that you don't want a rule for dual-wielding, and the reasoning seems sound to me—but then why have a rule for two-handed weapons giving advantage on damage rolls? (Maybe the difference is that in real life, a two-handed weapon makes sense, and sword with shield makes sense, but it's asinine try to hold twin weapons in most real-world fighting styles?)
To be clear, I'm not criticizing. I'm genuinely fascinated by the design process, and hoping you don't mind me mining you for tips on where to draw the line between "good, streamlined OSR game" and "rules that OSR players really prefer to be there." :)
Jason Tocci To be honest I'd never thought about this. I suppose you guessed it: dual wielding is not only unrealistic, but also a relatively modern trope. I suspect the ubiquity of twin weapons in pop culture nowadays was influenced by the AD&D ranger class. Also it's a question of taste: I'm not super interested in dual wielding characters in an old school game.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I'm happy to come up with a ruling when a player wants one. MM is about creating the character you want after all =)
And regarding your hack, I recommend you add whatever rules you feel comfortable running with. It's never a good idea to create for others!
ReplyDelete