Single-Handed Fighting

[David Bofinger]

TFT characters generally make use of both hands. If their primary weapon is one-handed then they typically have a shield in the left hand because why not.

But it's my impression a lot of characters in fantasy literature don't. Take a look at the guy in the foreground of the cover of canon TFT, for instance: it's hard to be sure because he's still getting ready but he looks like he's planning to fight with an empty left hand. Glancing through advertisements for miniatures suggest at least some characters do as well. One could argue that using a shield or a two-handed weapon in a fantasy story tends to mark a character as a specialist warrior.

So would it make sense to do that in TFT? What if the skill to fight with both hands was something you had to buy? The warriors probably buy it from the start. The non-warriors might pick it up when they're more experienced, or not, but probably don't buy it during character generation because they have other things to buy that are more important to their jobs. Would that capture the feel of most fantasy characters better?

[Chris Rice]

I don't see that it's necessary. To make use of the other hand in combat there are already some requirements; you need to have the Shield Talent to use a shield, you need the Two Weapons Talent to use a weapon in the other hand.

[Skarg]

I tend to think that fictional and artistic warriors not using their off-hand tends to be a matter of style and of a lack of concern and/or knowledge for realistic tactical considerations.

On the other hand, I might say that in reality, a competent warrior who has the time & opportunity to use a shield but is just using a one-handed melee weapon, is going to fight a lot differently than one with a shield - he'll be more focused on not getting hit by paying attention to reach and footwork and what can be done with the sword, as opposed to keeping the shield involved. And that (like most defensive considerations) is a gap in what TFT represents, except abstractly and lightly in the tradeoff of shield protection vs DX penalty. It'd be slightly more present if there were no -0 DX shields.

There could be an IQ 8 (1) talent for fighting without a shield & instead using mobility to try to avoid being hit, giving melee attacks a -1 DX.

Unfortunately the whole system already has a tight balance that under-represents avoiding getting hit, and adding anything tips various scales, and there are already several suggestions for various tweaks.

[Jim Kane]

In our Labyrinth Adventures, the off-hand usually held a torch; so in a way, most figures actually were holding two-weapons most of the time - *if* you follow my thinking.

That made the sword and shield figures, as well as, the two-handed weapon figures reliant on the torches of others to see in many cases; and also freed them from the burden of being a torch-bearer.

However, it has since been pointed out to me by Douglas Cole, that in reality, a figure can hold a shield and torch in the same hand.

In our games - for ease of play - we always just went by the idea that you could hold one thing in each hand; simple, and made the choice more interesting with the limitation, even if it did not jibe with reality.

JK

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by Jim Kane

in reality, a figure can hold a shield and torch in the same hand.

Was it RuneQuest that had as standard equipment a shield with a bracket for a torch?

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by Skarg

There could be an IQ 8 (1) talent for fighting without a shield & instead using mobility to try to avoid being hit, giving melee attacks a -1 DX.

There could, and maybe that would also be interesting, or you could have something similar but more expensive and powerful. But if I'm trying to model a tendency in fantasy fiction then I want one weapon to be the cheapest option. Which as Chris Rice points out it is now, but not by much.