What's a reasonable price for Weapon Master (two unrelated weapons)?

[kirbwarrior]

On the note of costing a perk for two weapons not used together, that does sound like a cheap UB and is effectively such. Having WM with two weapons that you normally can't is effectively UB territory. Personally I'm just going to use that from now on in situations it matters.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Game-mechanically, if you have more than four weapon skills, it's cheaper to increase DX.

That won't help you in ST-based rolls against your weapon skill though :)

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

On the note of costing a perk for two weapons not used together, that does sound like a cheap UB and is effectively such. Having WM with two weapons that you normally can't is effectively UB territory. Personally I'm just going to use that from now on in situations it matters.

UB has variable costs. Rather than trying to figure out what it is, I think it would make more sense just to use Alternative Abilities.

Basically any two one-handed weapons could normally be used together, so you wouldn't even need AA.

Bow+Sword is what we're talking about. You normally can't use them simultaneously so there's no need to have a Weapon Master active on both at the same time unless you're a 4-handed creature.

I think the idea of buying "Reduced Time +20%" on both Alternative Abilities to represent "switching between them takes a Free Action, not a Ready" seems pretty reasonable.

Probably overpriced since you are not reducing a core use of the abilities, just the time to swap. For example, changing Alternative Attacks (free action by default) to requiring a Ready seems to just be worth -5% per "Ammunition Options" (Power-Ups 4 pg 18)

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Plane

Bow+Sword is what we're talking about. You normally can't use them simultaneously so there's no need to have a Weapon Master active on both at the same time unless you're a 4-handed creature.

I don't think such a combo should get the full price reduction for the second weapon, because while you won't use them at the same time, they don't have a huge overlap in 'use envelopes'.

[Plane]

The higher price for weapons not normally used together implies that you CAN use them together, unless OP is a 4-armed creature, why would he bother?

[Aldric]

I really don't think this is what Alternate Abilities are for, unless maybe Weapon Master was granted by a magical sword that could also change shape into a bow, in which case it would just be part of the package.
I can't see a character that's a Master of the Sword OR the Bow, requiring conscious though (if not an action) to switch mastery.

In short, as I've said before, I'd point the player that camenup with this idea towards the 30 point level.

[Celjabba]

Originally Posted by Aldric

I really don't think this is what Alternate Abilities are for, unless maybe Weapon Master was granted by a magical sword that could also change shape into a bow, in which case it would just be part of the package.
I can't see a character that's a Master of the Sword OR the Bow, requiring conscious though (if not an action) to switch mastery.

In short, as I've said before, I'd point the player that camenup with this idea towards the 30 point level.

Getting rid of the switch bring the AA cost to 29 or 30, depending on the method.
So, [30] is perfectly legitimate.

It is clearly better than 1 weapon [20]
It is arguably better than 2 weapon used together [25] (greater range of situation, for example one melee and one ranged weapon)
It does consist of a (very) small class of weapon [30]

Myself, I would rule [25] (or maybe [25+1] with a rules exemption perk), but [30] is probably the fairest answer.

[Kalzazz]

I admit I always felt two weapons used together was perfect and meant for cases like a samurai katana and bow or an elf sword and bow or a Native American braves tomahawk and bow

So I'd happilly allow 'longsword and bow' for 25

For 30 I'd allow a bigger group 'Samurai Weapons' 'Elven Weapons' 'Brave Weapons'

[Hide]

Originally Posted by awesomenessofme1

(...) So what would a reasonable price be for two unrelated weapons, say bastard sword and composite bow? (...)

Perhaps the easiest solution would be buying the "extended" weapon master for 30 points. This version shall give your character extra room to master additional weapons in the future.

If you have an issue with CP, then you should buy a perk level unusual background "master in two unrelated weapons", which as a GM I would charge for 1 CP, the final investment being 26 CP.

If you limit the amount of perks a character can buy during creation and development, then the cost is even more fair. Something like: "Should you sacrifice a perk or should you spend more CP?"

Originally Posted by Kalzazz

I admit I always felt two weapons used together was perfect and meant for cases like a samurai katana and bow or an elf sword and bow or a Native American braves tomahawk and bow (...)

I like your idea. However, it is different. These warriors train in both weapons, but they don't use them together. To make it more evident, you don't shoot the bow while holding the tomahawk; when you fight, it's only one of these, in contrast with sword & shield or rapier & main-gauche.

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by Plane

UB has variable costs. Rather than trying to figure out what it is, I think it would make more sense just to use Alternative Abilities.

Ignoring how weird using two WMs as AAs is, UB is easy to cost in this situation. It's at least as good as the 25pt version, and probably worse than the 30pt version, so;

Originally Posted by Celjabba

Myself, I would rule [25] (or maybe [25+1] with a rules exemption perk), but [30] is probably the fairest answer.

Thanks, I forgot the perk version of UB is "rules exemption perk". And this seems like the perfect place for such a perk.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

how weird using two WMs as AAs is

Why would it be weird? Consider them shifting a mental focus between their mastery in 2 things.