[MA] Technique Mastery for DWA?

[cbower]

I'd say no to this as fast as I did to they guy who wanted to learn DWA for Flail.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by cbower

I'd say no to this as fast as I did to they guy who wanted to learn DWA for Flail.

I'd have to ask why. Double 'chucks is realistic, although not easy (although Danny Inosanto makes it look so). Double morningstars probably less so, but with Parry U it's basically unsafe to do without an exceptional Dodge.

[cbower]

Originally Posted by Peter V. Dell'Orto

I'd have to ask why. Double 'chucks is realistic, although not easy (although Danny Inosanto makes it look so). Double morningstars probably less so, but with Parry U it's basically unsafe to do without an exceptional Dodge.

Mostly because I think full-fledged morningstars are too unwieldy to use in each hand. I didn't think about the nunchucks thing, though, so I might offer him the opportunity since his last PC just died, and his replacement is an annoyance.

[lexington]

Originally Posted by cbower

Mostly because I think full-fledged morningstars are too unwieldy to use in each hand. I didn't think about the nunchucks thing, though, so I might offer him the opportunity since his last PC just died, and his replacement is an annoyance.

Say say that a "full-fledged morningstar" is a straight up Flail from Low-Tech or Basic Set. Without ST20 one in each hand is simply not going to happen and it won't be very smart without ST26.

[Gold & Appel Inc]

Originally Posted by lexington

Say say that a "full-fledged morningstar" is a straight up Flail from Low-Tech or Basic Set. Without ST20 one in each hand is simply not going to happen and it won't be very smart without ST26.

Why would we not say that a "full-fledged morningstar" is the thing called a morningstar higher up in the same stat blocks..?

[lexington]

Originally Posted by Gold & Appel Inc

Why would we not say that a "full-fledged morningstar" is the thing called a morningstar higher up in the same stat blocks..?

Because this one is bigger.

[Gold & Appel Inc]

Originally Posted by lexington

Because this one is bigger.

Yes, but it's not the same thing. The original comparison was between Nunchaku and Morningstars, not between Nunchaku and everything covered by any Skill that has "Flail" in the name.

[vierasmarius]

Originally Posted by cbower

Mostly because I think full-fledged morningstars are too unwieldy to use in each hand.

I feel you may be confusing "it wasn't done" for "it can't be done". Morningstars certainly weren't used in both hands, because it was totally impractical. They were developed as battlefield weapons, and a front-line warrior needs a shield to protect himself and his allies. An off-hand weapon is simply not helpful. Nunchucks, on the other hand, are a civilian adaption of the flail. Civilian weapons face very different conditions which make dual-wielding a feasible, even attractive, option.

Realistically, a morningstar's Min ST 12 should be more of a hindrance than it is in GURPS. A fighter swinging a pair of 6lb morningstars will fatigue far faster than one twirling a couple of 2lb nunchucks, even if he's got plenty of ST for either one. But the same would apply to swinging a pair of ST 12 maces, and to a lesser extent the wide range of 1-handed ST 11 weapons. At present that is well below the resolution of GURPS.

All of this pretty much goes out the window in a cinematic game, of course. There you'll see a mish-mash of civilian and soldierly weapons and styles. If allowing DWA to be improved at all, I wouldn't single out morningstars as being inappropriate.

[Kromm]

"A skill's core uses aren't eligible" catches this one. The actual roll against Dual-Weapon Attack is for core use: standard attacks. You can have Technique Adaptation only for peripheral attacks. It would take a very lawyer-like reading to claim, "Attacking once with one hand is a core use, sure, but once you do it with both hands at once, that changes." That would be like saying it's okay to use Technique Adaptation to get +4 to Wrestling as long as you insist that it only covers two-handed grapples.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Kromm

"A skill's core uses aren't eligible" catches this one.

Oh well. I hate when my own ideas ("Sean, we need to cover those ridiculous one-technique masters from kung fu movies!") cut down on the total awesome of a campaign.