off hand weapon training perk and technique

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by joppeknol

Was this legal? Why wouldn't everyone do this? (Except for when it doesn't fit the character concept.).

As other have pointed out, it's perfectly legal, and it's a fix to the cost of OHWT which is extremely overpriced for what you get.

As for why everyone doesn't do it, let's start here:

Originally Posted by Gurps Fan

Remember that while the combat option called "Dual-Weapon Attack" is allowed (with GM permission, of course) in a realistic campaign, the technique with the same name is a cinematic technique -- buying Trained By A Master [30] or Weapon Master [20 to 45] beforehand is one of the prerequisites to learn Dual-Weapon Attack technique. See Martial Arts, pp. 82-83.

First off, this one. Although some martial arts styles allow you to buy a restricted version of Dual-Weapon Attack as a realistic technique, with a special perk (Unusual Training), it's a cinematic technique. So you need to satisfy some pretty steep requirements to get it. Sure, someone who already has Weapon Master or Train By A Master can just pick it up, but that's not the same as saying it's a mere 5 points for DWA maxed-out, 6 with OHWT. It's more like 26+ points for the full version, 7+ points and a martial arts style that allows it (which in turn means more points spent.) The full version has to compete with Rapid Strike at -3 each, so you need to buy up DWA to even keep up with what you could do with one weapon skill.

Second, even in a cinematic game, you give up a lot without a shield. "Dual-Wield" looks a lot cooler in movies and in video games that don't worry too much about defenses in the first place. It's suckier in a game with arrows and quarrels and sling bullets because you're reduces to Dodge since you don't have Block. You get some nice parries, yes, but you give up the DB of a shield to do it.

You also give up two-handed weapon use, which means you give up some damage, potentially give up better parries (if you're using GURPS Martial Arts), and often give up reach (not all that many one-handed weapons have reach 2; ones such as rapiers do but come with their own special issues).

And as others have also said, there is the expense of getting another weapon. DWA and OHWT is really only useful if you've got two weapons, and those need to be paid for.

In my own games, guys with two weapons get shot with bows or missile spells, because you're announcing you are pretty good with dual weapons and you have defense issues against missiles.

None of this is saying DWA is bad. In fact, it's good. But it's not always the best choice, and it's giving up a lot to get a lot. The cost seems pretty fair for the tradeoffs.

[Gurps Fan]

Peter-sensei kakko-ī.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by Peter V. Dell'Orto

Although some martial arts styles allow you to buy a restricted version of Dual-Weapon Attack as a realistic technique, with a special perk (Unusual Training), it's a cinematic technique.

Question, that restricted version just referring restricted choice in weapons you many learn it for [defined by the style] or is it referring to some other restrictions on how it's used?

[Gnome]

Of course the four-armed Coleopteran from DF3 can have it both ways--DWA and a shield! I played a Coleopteran Swashbuckler in a long-running DF game using this combo. He had three attacks a turn, or nine attacks a turn after getting buffed up with Partial Shapeshifting (Spider Arms) and Great Haste!
{First maneuever AoA (Double) (2 attacks), Extra Attack 2 (+2 attacks), DWA (+1 attack); second maneuver Attack (1 attack), Extra Attack 2 (+2 attacks), DWA (+1 attack).}

[the_matrix_walker]

Originally Posted by Gnome

Of course the four-armed Coleopteran from DF3 can have it both ways--DWA and a shield! I played a Coleopteran Swashbuckler in a long-running DF game using this combo. He had three attacks a turn, or nine attacks a turn after getting buffed up with Partial Shapeshifting (Spider Arms) and Great Haste!
{First maneuever AoA (Double) (2 attacks), Extra Attack 2 (+2 attacks), DWA (+1 attack); second maneuver Attack (1 attack), Extra Attack 2 (+2 attacks), DWA (+1 attack).}

He could have had allot more... "Dual Weapon Attack" is actually "number of arms weapon attack"

Originally Posted by Kromm

Weapon Mount doesn't require other limbs to use it . . . it's a limb that's good only for mounting a weapon. And yes, if a character is of a race and a TL where it makes sense to have N Weapon Mounts, he could turn Dual-Weapon Attack into (N+2)-Weapon Attack, allowing him to attack one target at -4 once and then at -8 N+1 more times, possibly buying this up to full skill with suitable perks and techniques. What keeps this under control is the GM's limit on Weapon Mounts (on a humanoid body, two is about the upper limit) and the PC's budget for weapons and ammo. And of course Dual-Weapon Attack, Extra Arms (Weapon Mount), and Off-Hand Weapon Training aren't free, and being able to engage lots of foes this way calls for Enhanced Tracking.

To compare to the real world: Imagine that the PC is the pilot of an attack helicopter with two Weapon Mounts on each side, on pylons under stub wings, and another in a chin turret. Raking the same target with fire from all five is entirely plausible. He points the aircraft to aim one weapon (at 0 to hit for the "master" hand) and all the others are sort of pointed there (at -4 for the "off" hand). Firing lots of weapons at once gives a further -4 (as for Dual-Weapon Attack) because it's distracting and hard to coordinate. Aiming the weapons individually is impossible without Enhanced Tracking in the form of fancy targeting computers, guided weapons, etc.

[Kromm]

Peter has the right of it. Furthermore, consider what the actual tradeoff is in a world with shields. Let's consider DX 14 warriors who like broadswords for definiteness. Similar logic holds for other fighters.

I

Broadsword (A) DX+2 [8]-16, Off-Hand Weapon Training (Broadsword) [1], Dual-Weapon Attack (Broadsword) (H) Skill+0 [5]-16. 14 points.

Two thrusting broadswords ($600 each). $1,200.

Offense: Two attacks at skill 16.

Defense: Two parries at 11, then two parries at 7, etc. Parries aren't useful vs. missiles. Must rely on Dodge for that; Dodge gets no DB.

II

Broadsword (A) DX+2 [8]-16, Shield (E) DX+2 [4]-16. 12 points.

One thrusting broadsword ($600), one medium shield (DB 2, $60). $660.

Offense: One attack at skill 16 or two attacks (Rapid Strike) at skill 10.

Defense (adding shield DB!): One parry at 13, one block at 13, then another parry at 9 and another block at 8, etc. Blocks are useful vs. missiles. Also has Dodge, and this is at +2 for DB.

The second fighter is better off defensively for sure: He has higher defenses across the board and protection against missiles. He isn't as well off offensively, though . . . he has to take -6 to hit for that second attack. But do note that he also has 2 points and $540 more to play with. He could use those assets to improve offense in other ways, or emphasize his strengths and go for even better defense. I would say that it comes down to a matter of taste.

In practice, after running hundreds of hours of combats, I've seen no huge edge going to two-weapon fighters. Once you get up to Weapon Master types who can justify raising DWA in the first place, the gap closes further, as the Rapid Strike penalty shrinks to -3 and the leftover points and cash can offset most of this via balanced weapons and Weapon Bonds.

[Gnome]

Originally Posted by the_matrix_walker

He could have had allot more... "Dual Weapon Attack" is actually "number of arms weapon attack"

Well...that sure wasn't clear from the text. I wish I'd known about that...I would have tried to convince my GM to let me take six attacks with one DWA! That said, I'm pretty sure my GM would have rightfully said "no." Even if the almighty Kromm thinks it makes sense to play it this way, the wording on B417 is pretty clear: "If you have at least two hands, you can strike with two hands at once using an Attack maneuver instead of an All-Out Attack (Double) maneuver." It doesn't say you can strike with all your hands at once, it says you can strike with two hands at once.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

Question, that restricted version just referring restricted choice in weapons you many learn it for [defined by the style] or is it referring to some other restrictions on how it's used?

Both. Look at, say, Escrima (p. 156) - you can learn DWA for any of your variety of weapons, but you can only launch attacks on the same target. Regular DWA lets you split it out. Or Wushu (p. 207), which allows a split kick that can only target adjacent foes, not two kicks to one foe. They all come with restrictions if bought as a realistic technique. This sort of restriction is specifically called out on p. 52 of MA, as well.

[Gurps Fan]

Originally Posted by the_matrix_walker

He could have had allot more... "Dual Weapon Attack" is actually "number of arms weapon attack"

That's a hasty generalization. In the same thread Kromm further pointed out:

Originally Posted by Kromm

It's from not having Enhanced Tracking, actually. Ranged and melee DWA are not the same beast.

[Vynticator]

It may be worth mentioning that combat perks are quite precious, since you'll only be allowed one or two in most point budgets (following the 1 per 20 points in combat skills guidline) and you might well want some of the other juicy options (eg. Technique Mastery, Special Exercises, Teamwork, etc.)