Rapid striking with dual weapons?

[zeecaptain]

I've been looking at the rules governing Rapid Strike and the Dual Weapon Attack technique, and I know that the rules make them mutually exclusive.

What I'm wondering is, can there be exceptions? If a Rapid Strike represents striking twice in quick succession or an attack-and-followup with one hand/weapon, and DWA represents attacking with two held weapons at once...logically, wouldn't that allow a Rapid Strike with both held weapons? Like, if I'm ambidextrous, and have training in DWA, shouldn't I be able to pull off with two hands what I can already do one-handed?

[Dinadon]

The only real exceptions are Combinations, since you can have one the attacks be with the off hand, and Rapid-Striking with thrown weapons.

Really though, this the point where you're suppose to just but Extra Attack. Skill is cheap, but at 24 points for +6 skill to cancel out the penalty for Rapid Strike this is equivalent to the cost of Extra Attack(Multi-Strike, Single Skill). If add on the lowest level of Weapon Master for 20 points you've now spent 44 points to perform a three attack Rapid Strike, which is still close enough to the cost of Extra Attack. Of course since the WM only has to deal with -3 per attack they could over take someone taking Extra Attack in terms of attacks per turn, if they're allowed unlimited Rapid Strikes and aren't worried about using that skill for other things.

Now take an Ambidextrous Dual-Wielder, that's ten points net. With +6 skill that's a total of 34 points. If you could Rapid-Strike with both that would be a total of four attacks, which is better than a WM using only a single weapon! If you added WM that would be 54 points for a total of 6 attacks, which is definitely better than the two you could get from Extra Attack.

Now Rapid-Strike with Thrown Weapons does allow a Dual Rapid Strike, letting you declare the Rapid-Strike penalty for each hand separately, but there are several things it has to worry about that melee weapons won't care about.
1. Readying. Either you spend several turns carefully readying the thrown weapons into each hand, or you rely on multiple Fast-Draws.
2. Declaration. The RS penalty is based on the number of attacks you declared you were doing. If you fail your first Fast-Draw roll then that's the end of your attacks with that hand.
3. Ammo. Eventually you'll run out. Also the amount of swing based throwing weapons you can carry will be lower that for thrust based ones.

[zeecaptain]

I'm going to have Weapon Master regardless, for the reduced multiple parry penalty and the bonus to damage. Likewise, ambidexterity and DWA are must-haves. Weapon master halves the -6 to skill, so only 12 points would be needed to compensate. For my purposes, the extra attack would cost more than necessary.

What I was thinking in the beginning was if one weapon can get two attacks per round, then two weapons should be able to get four attacks per round.

[Maz]

The reason they can't be used together is due to game balance. If you open up for it there would be a massive "attack" inflation as they the same should be true for Rapid Strike while using AOA:double or for simply having Extra Attack.

They aren't "the same" either. They aren't simply "two ways to get an extra attack". DWA for instance gives an additional -1 to defense, but can then be countered with DWdefense. While Rapid Strike cant' be used on a move and attack action.

[Grouchy Chris]

Originally Posted by zeecaptain

What I'm wondering is, can there be exceptions? If a Rapid Strike represents striking twice in quick succession or an attack-and-followup with one hand/weapon, and DWA represents attacking with two held weapons at once...logically, wouldn't that allow a Rapid Strike with both held weapons? Like, if I'm ambidextrous, and have training in DWA, shouldn't I be able to pull off with two hands what I can already do one-handed?

I say no, because a melee weapon attack is not normally something done with only one hand, or even only one arm. A thrust with a sword, for instance, involves the weapon arm, the shoulders, the torso, the legs, and very likely the other arm as a counterbalance. You use your whole body to make an attack with a weapon held in only one hand. DWA is harder, in part, because you are foregoing what would be a good posture for a single attack in order to make two attacks. You must face your opponent more squarely, you have to bring both arms forward simultaneously, et cetera.

If you want to get more attacks in, then I agree that Extra Attack is the way to go.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by zeecaptain

What I was thinking in the beginning was if one weapon can get two attacks per round, then two weapons should be able to get four attacks per round.

You do realize the GM is going to pull out 4 armed monsters and murder you with 16 attacks a round if he says OK to this?

[Kazander]

Originally Posted by Bruno

You do realize the GM is going to pull out 4 armed monsters and murder you with 16 attacks a round if he says OK to this?

Hee-hee!. Exactly my thought. ;-)

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by Bruno

You do realize the GM is going to pull out 4 armed monsters and murder you with 16 attacks a round if he says OK to this?

Isn't there a monster based on this concept and the end of the DF:Monsters book with the warning these are only as a deterrence against abusing magic?

[zoncxs]

there is and it is based on extra attack (3) + ATR + ETS + basic speed 10

[Joe]

Originally Posted by zeecaptain

Like, if I'm ambidextrous, and have training in DWA, shouldn't I be able to pull off with two hands what I can already do one-handed?

Originally Posted by Grouchy Chris

I say no, because a melee weapon attack is not normally something done with only one hand, or even only one arm.... You use your whole body...

This seems right to me. A two-weapon attack isn't just two normal attacks executed simultaneously; it's a whole 'nother thing, with different body positions, striking angles, and all that.

Similarly, being ambidextrous means that you're equally co-ordinated with both hands; it doesn't mean that you're able to do everything you can do with one hand with the other one at the same time. I'd never really thought about it before, but there's actually quite big difference. The hand never really operates alone.

So there's no reason to believe that someone with DWA and ambidexterity would necessarily be able to pull off with two hands at once whatever they can already do one-handed. It's just a different kettle of fish.