Help a n00b - Wielding dual weapons

[Witchking]

Originally Posted by trooper6

So...yeah...I'm uncertain about the going from DF back to GURPS rules wise. Anyone have insight on this topic?

Only if I as a GM say I am running a DF RAW game...If I say I am Running a GURPS RAW game then I would deal with DF the same as I would Ultra Tech or Psionics etc...as they fit into the Campaign Setting.

But if I am running Fantasy (my preference) lots and lots of DF would be no, some of it might be accessable via Unusual Backround.

The professions of course are architypes so for ideas they make a good mine.

<My non-DF mage had fit...eventually>

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

This may be correct, but it strikes my internal warning bell. The techniques don't add to everything, just what you can do with THAT technique. It's not a generic bonus to all skills for all things. It might be a case where the way you're using it, it might as well be such a bonus, but I'd look carefully at the construction of such, since if you start with Staff-22 and have three techniques at +4, what you have is three techniques at 26, not one uber-skill at 34.

Martial Arts, pg64, "Using Techniques Together" specifies that you sum the modifiers together. So if you do a spinning low-fighting counterattack and you have TM on all three and maxed out all three...then you are getting a +12 to your skill.

Kromm has mentioned that stacking in general is not broken, especially if you use the limitations on getting perks as listed in the MA book. It is a huge point investment to get to that point, and generally, it only works in very specific situations. However, in our game, it was the Low-Fighting/Crouch combo that was so problematic. I'm sure if rather than crouch, he had to kneel or sit in order to pull off all of that madness, it would have been a very, very different story.

Take, for example, my fighter (who didn't really get to capitalize on this). I ended up getting Technique Mastery: DWA and TM: Counterattack. So in those situations where I had successfully parried, I could then DWA+Counterattack for +8 to skill. That +8, I'd usually translate to a -8/-4 Deceptive attack...which usually still wasn't enough to consistently get through people's defenses. However, people saw I was doing this and they had ways to counter...mostly by attacking my weapons with big heavy shields, or going for a disarm. The minute I was reduced to one weapon (which happened with disturbing frequency) I lost that ability to stack...and the points I put there. And, if the Ogre got to attack first, even without the counterattack he could regularly bring to bear 7 Strike Rapid Strikes...and there almost never was an opportunity for me counterattack...because I was unconscious.

Honestly, I think the problem was the Crouch. There is no downside to crouching, no one can stop you from crouching, and if you don't move, you are only crouched during the attack itself--so no one can take advantage of it...though, with no defense penalty, there is also nothing to take advantage of. My DWA fighter only got 2 attacks (good ones), but by using DWA, I forwent using Rapid Strikes...so there were tradeoffs. Or with counterattack, there was a set up that wasn't always certain. Low Fighting with kneeling or sitting has tradeoffs...but crouching? No tradeoff, no negation.

[Dinadon]

Originally Posted by trooper6

But actually, I think the problem is not with stacking Technique Mastery, but with Crouching. Crouching can be done twice as a free action on your turn if you don't do more than a step (at the beginning to crouch, at the end to un-crouch).

I'm fairly certain this isn't true, but p.B368 is a little ambiguous. As far as I read it, the last sentence is simply a counter point to the first. To abbreviate it: "If you are standing at the start of your turn you may crouch, but if you are crouching you may stand." Bobbing up and down every second breaks my SoD.


Personally, I do think of TM as a potential nuisance. Which is why I only allow it to be taken as style perk, not a general perk, and only for techniques specifically listed for your style.

[BaHalus]

Dungeon fantasy is not raw. It is written in the introduction of dungeon fantasy.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Dinadon

I'm fairly certain this isn't true, but p.B368 is a little ambiguous. As far as I read it, the last sentence is simply a counter point to the first. To abbreviate it: "If you are standing at the start of your turn you may crouch, but if you are crouching you may stand." Bobbing up and down every second breaks my SoD.


Personally, I do think of TM as a potential nuisance. Which is why I only allow it to be taken as style perk, not a general perk, and only for techniques specifically listed for your style.

Isn't that a Pop-Up Attack?

[Dinadon]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Isn't that a Pop-Up Attack?

Meh. 'Implied explanation as to differences.'

[Dustin]

Originally Posted by Dinadon

I'm fairly certain this isn't true, but p.B368 is a little ambiguous.

Agreed -- I've always read B368 as only permitting going either into or out of a crouch during any given turn, not both during the turn, but the wording could be made clearer.

[vierasmarius]

Originally Posted by Dustin

Agreed -- I've always read B368 as only permitting going either into or out of a crouch during any given turn, not both during the turn, but the wording could be made clearer.

If it's not automatically allowed, it could probably be done with an Acrobatics roll. That would at least increase the points needed for the build, and make it slightly harder to pull off.

[pawsplay]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

If it's not automatically allowed, it could probably be done with an Acrobatics roll. That would at least increase the points needed for the build, and make it slightly harder to pull off.

I'm not sure how that relates to Acrobatics. I would be more inclined to build a new technique.

[trooper6]

But even if you have to stay crouched at the end of the turn, there is no down side, because Crouching has no defense penalty associated with it...so there is no downside...

B368, last sentence of the Crouching sections says: "But if you are already crouching, you may leave your crouch at any time as a free action."

So even if the GM ruled that you couldn't stand up if you crouched at the beginning of the turn, then you could simply stand up as a free action at the beginning of your turn if you needed to move.