Author Topic: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting  (Read 5654 times)

Sir Pelleas

  • Guest
Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« on: October 29, 2010, 04:44:46 PM »
Hello!  I'm new to the system but excited to begin my first campaign with a few friends.

I can't seem to find any rules on a knight wielding two weapons at once.  Would a knight have to have a separate combat skill for a Florentine fighting style?  Or would each two-weapon combat roll incur a multiple-action penalty?  Or is there a different mechanic involved?

I apologize if there's a rule on this buried in the text somewhere.  If you could point me to it, I would appreciate it.

Offline Sir Pramalot

  • Pendragon Council
  • Knight Lord
  • *
  • Posts: 616
  • Glory Attained: 8
    • View Profile
    • KAP5
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #1 on: October 30, 2010, 08:23:53 AM »
There's nothing in the rules that deals with this subject - well at least not 4th or 5th ed - but there are plenty of house rules on the subject. For my part, I'm using a very basic setup; if you wield two weapons you can choose which one to use each round. That's it! Not too inspiring I admit. The advantage being that a PK can use a weapon more suited to the situation without suffering the penalty of changing and they do also have a backup should one of them be dropped or broken.

The problem really is one of game balance. Too good an advantage and everyone will use it, too bad and no one will. I've yet to hit on something that walks the fine line between both. Odd I admit, especially when you consider that in many movies, 2 weapon style is used almost exclusively. eg, from memory I struggle to think of a single sword+shield combat - on foot - in all of Excalibur.

Offline Gideon13

  • Knight Bachelor
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
  • Glory Attained: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #2 on: October 30, 2010, 10:47:02 AM »
Florentine is so common in movies because it looks cool no shield to block the views of the cool moves.

Problem: It was rarely used in real medieval Western Europe because the blocking sword gets all chewed up.  Think how in Viking holmgangs the duelists were *limited* to only three shields each taking that kind of damage on a sword gets very expensive, very quickly. 

This is also a case where the exceptions prove the rule.  For example, the Renaissance had twin rapiers, but there you were deflecting mostly-light thrusting weapons as opposed to heavy cutting weapons.  And Richard the Lionheart managed to pull off spear-and-axe but those are cheap weapons, and Richard was very, very good.

Sir Pelleas

  • Guest
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #3 on: October 30, 2010, 06:42:15 PM »
I'm trying to use something more concrete without unbalancing the system in favor of Florentine style.  I think most systems handle that by imposing a damage/accuracy penalty to the off-hand weapon. 

I was considering also increasing the threshold for weapon-breaking while fighting Florentine -- upping it to a weapon breaking on a 2 instead of a 1, for instance.  But then there's still a problem of what to do about swords.

noir

  • Guest
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #4 on: October 31, 2010, 09:09:46 AM »
In our game, we run with a virtue/flaw system, where "two weapons" is a virtue you can "buy" as both major and minor. This thing is ofc tangled up in loads of other rules, and wouldn't fit your needs. So, here's what I suggest (playtested and ready):

1. Make "Two Weapons" a new skill, and use the lowest of that skill and the regular weapon skills when rolling in combat (either for both the main hand weapon or just the off hand one, depending on how cruel you are as a GM).

2. You must also decide if the two weapon rolls are "individual" weapon rolls, both pitted against your enemy's weapon roll (enabling you to hit twice in one round), or if the extra weapon just gives you two skill rolls and let you choose the best result.

// M

Offline jolt

  • Squire
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Glory Attained: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #5 on: November 01, 2010, 09:25:17 AM »
I don't remember where, but some book (4th ed. or earlier obviously) said that if you wielded two weapons it counted as one attack with the off-hand weapon adding +1d6 damage (and nothing else).  I think it was one of those optional side-box rules from one of the 4th supplements but I'm drawing a blank as to which one.

jolt

Offline Eothar

  • Knight Vassal
  • ****
  • Posts: 349
  • Glory Attained: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #6 on: November 01, 2010, 12:17:20 PM »
What exactly do you mean by Florentine--cut and thrust style (sword and dagger)?  I'm familar with the Bolognese school (Achille Marozzo etc), but I've not hear of Florentine style before.

If you wanted to bring more real world fighting styles into Pendragon, the most relevant would seem to be the Longsword (either of Germanic or Italian tradition).  By Longsword I mean hand and a half sword with halfswording giving better damage versus armor.  The easy thing to do would be just to treat it as a regular sword but allow it to have +1d6 when used two handed.

Offline Greg Stafford

  • Global Moderator
  • Round Table Knight
  • *****
  • Posts: 2237
  • Glory Attained: 44
    • View Profile
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #7 on: November 01, 2010, 07:28:50 PM »
There's nothing in the rules that deals with this subject

I have failed to find any historical or literary use of such, hence, no rules.

Movies, comic books and kung fu knights do not count.
-- Greg Stafford
Game Designer

Offline Eothar

  • Knight Vassal
  • ****
  • Posts: 349
  • Glory Attained: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #8 on: November 02, 2010, 11:25:33 AM »
There's nothing in the rules that deals with this subject

I have failed to find any historical or literary use of such, hence, no rules.

Movies, comic books and kung fu knights do not count.


I am also unaware of heavily armored knights using two weapons with any frequency.  By the time of full plate, the longsword used two handed (on foot) would have been standard.

From the 1500's on, sword and dagger techniques (look up Achille Marozzo on wikipedia) were common, but not for armored fighting.  You really couldn't hurt some one in full plate with a one handed sword.



Sir Pelleas

  • Guest
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #9 on: November 02, 2010, 05:11:28 PM »
What exactly do you mean by Florentine--cut and thrust style (sword and dagger)?  I'm familar with the Bolognese school (Achille Marozzo etc), but I've not hear of Florentine style before.

If you wanted to bring more real world fighting styles into Pendragon, the most relevant would seem to be the Longsword (either of Germanic or Italian tradition).  By Longsword I mean hand and a half sword with halfswording giving better damage versus armor.  The easy thing to do would be just to treat it as a regular sword but allow it to have +1d6 when used two handed.

Honestly, I've just heard two-weapon fighting referred to as "Florentine" many times.  I couldn't tell you the origin, unfortunately.  Sword and dagger is a common pairing, yes.

Historically, I've heard only of the parrying dagger, which appeared toward the end of the 15th century.  Still, its name indicates it was not usually used for striking. 

Thanks for all of the input. 

Offline jolt

  • Squire
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Glory Attained: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #10 on: November 04, 2010, 09:43:17 AM »
Florentine refers to a variation of Renaissance-era swordplay where the fighter would wield a rapier in each hand.  Typically, the rapiers would be carried in a wooden case rather than in traditional scabbards.

I was positive that some book, at some point, included an optional rule for a weapon in each hand.  That's going to drive me crazy until I pore through every single Pendragon book I have.  *sigh*

jolt

Offline Eothar

  • Knight Vassal
  • ****
  • Posts: 349
  • Glory Attained: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #11 on: November 04, 2010, 10:14:14 AM »
Ah, ok.  I've heard that referred to as, "Case of Rapiers". 
NT

Offline Morien

  • Round Table Knight
  • ******
  • Posts: 886
  • Glory Attained: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #12 on: November 09, 2010, 08:36:17 AM »
I was positive that some book, at some point, included an optional rule for a weapon in each hand.  That's going to drive me crazy until I pore through every single Pendragon book I have.  *sigh*

I think it was the Tales of Tournament or some such, Adventure of the Circlet of Gold, where one of the opponents used two weapons at once. The rules were simple:
1) Have additional skill, Two-Weapon (combination) Fighting. For example, Two Weapon (Axe & Sword) Fighting.
2) Roll vs. the LOWEST of all applicable skills. For example, Axe, Sword, Two Weapon (Axe & Sword) Fighting.
3) On partial success, you get no benefit since you do not have a shield.
4) On a success, you hit with both weapons (against same opponent, see Bear), with shield+armor+armor of honor protecting against each hit separately.

My players considered for a brief moment the hassle of needing at least two skills to raise to above 20, compared to just one, and decided it was not worth it.

Offline villagereaver

  • Squire
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Glory Attained: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #13 on: November 09, 2010, 03:14:00 PM »
My players considered for a brief moment the hassle of needing at least two skills to raise to above 20, compared to just one, and decided it was not worth it.

As a rules lawyer & min-maxxer, I can assure you that if I were to need two skills (minimum) and not get a shield bonus on the off chance that I would get to apply more damage, I would straight up laugh in your face.  Even as tough as my PK is (38HP, 24CON, 6d6+2DAM), there is NO WAY that I would give up 6 points of damage reduction via my shield (at least until it is sundered by a Saxon axe). 

Offline DarrenHill

  • Global Moderator
  • Round Table Knight
  • *****
  • Posts: 893
  • Glory Attained: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Dual-wielding/Florentine fighting
« Reply #14 on: November 23, 2010, 07:17:11 AM »
I can't seem to find any rules on a knight wielding two weapons at once.  Would a knight have to have a separate combat skill for a Florentine fighting style?  Or would each two-weapon combat roll incur a multiple-action penalty?  Or is there a different mechanic involved?

I apologize if there's a rule on this buried in the text somewhere.  If you could point me to it, I would appreciate it.

There is a two-weapon fighting in the tournament of dreams supplement, but it's unbalanced and should not be used.
In my opinion, shield and sword fighting is superior to two weapon fighting, swashbuckling movies be damned, and two-weapon fighting does not belong in an arthurian game except as an occasional exotic thing to be encountered - say, the odd faerie knight.

If you want a balanced rule, something like this: allow players to fight with two weapons, and each turn, have them choose which they are attacking with. That's the skill they use. The advantage is: if they drop a weapon or break one, they still have one in hand and suffer no round of having to recover. The disadvantage is: just like two-handed sword, they get no shield.

Note: using a weapon defensively is already a part of the system. When you make an opposed roll, you are both attacking and defending, and if you roll higher than your foe, it is likely because your defence was good enough to allow you to get an opportunity to strike.
If off-handed weapons were allowed a protection similar to shields, then 2-handed swords should get them too, because authentic historical two-handed sword fighting has lots of defensive aspects to it.
So, a second, off-hand weapon does not grant extra armour protection. If you want that, use a shield.