Paid a bod yn dwp

Yes we were talking about this on the other thread. That sentence refers to the old RQ2 rules and should be ignored. It’s the only serious rules mistake I’ve come across, though I haven’t read the whole book yet. It has led to a lot of confusion though - It just needs to state you can make two attacks. Parry is the same as for 1 weapon use. Edit: Once that sentence is removed, i believe a lot of the confusion fades away. There was a lot of back & fore on the other thread which probably didn't help your understanding, as we all voiced opinions and interpretations trying to justify a sentence that shouldn't have been there. Thanks to @Jason Durall for clearing that up for us.

It’s going to be a mighty fine looking book.

@Jason Durall Will it be possible to correct this sentence in RQG before it goes to print? After your clarifications it’s apprent this is a mistaken carry over from the RQ2 rules.

Wait. I can attack with a weapon, and (with that same weapon) parry an open-ended number of times. But if I smack someone with the edge of my shield, I can't parry with it? That makes no sense at all. I buy into this rule on shields. For me it emphasises the bulk and reach or lack of. It’s a bit more of an awkward attacking weapon - Certainly less agile to use then a blade or spear anyway. In a gamest way this works for me.

So all shield users should bash with their shield, because there is no reason not to (other than risking damage to the shield)? No. Shields have their own ruling on this. They can only use parry or attack in a round, not both

I’d say that the ruling doesn’t need to say anything about parry, as it follows the same rule used with a single weapon. There’s no difference. Perhaps it could mention that the defender should nominate which weapon he is leading the parry with for purposes of damage given/received? I would say it’s important to mention that a two weapon user can attack twice ( providing strike ranks allow)

The thing is with the RQG rule change on parries and subsequent parries we already have multiple parry options. Jason has confirmed that with 2 weapon use you only have one parry attempt against an attack. There is therefore no need to state you are allowed 2 parries as per the rule on p224. It’s apparent now that that rule is a relic from RQ2, and needs to be reworded. All that needs to be stated is that you can make 1 or 2 attacks

We must cast off this befuddle spell! Yes it’s true! Those are the new parry rules. One weapon can both attack and parry in a melee round. And parry an unlimited number of times but with -20 penalty Two Weapon Use is the contentious issue, which at present is suggesting that you can’t make two attacks and parry in a melee round. Though it appears that Jason is perhaps hinting that you can. It’s all now pointing towards the following sentence, which I think has been mistakenly included in RQG. Waiting for confirmation from @Jason Durall on this

Yes precisely - following @Jason Durallclarifications I think there is gathering consensus on this point which needs clarification.

Thanks Jason. Ok - this corrects my previous understanding. So Two Weapon Fighting doesn't allow two parries against the same attack. Thats clear now. For me the only remaining problematic sticking point in all this is the wording on Two Weapon Use (p224) : "Any adventurer using a weapon in each hand may use them for two attacks, two parries, or one attack and one parry. " As you have clarified that with Two Weapon Use you can only attempt to parry a single attack once, it seems to make the text above redundant particularly in light of the RQG rules on subsequent parries. It really seems that it needs rewording. Here's my take (and questions) on that text in light of your clarifications: Two attacks ( Can you also still parry, as per the RQG rules on parry and subsequent parries? We've all presumed you can't because of the second point on two parries) Two Parries ( I presume this is in need of deleting?) One attack & one parry ( I presume this is correct) Depending on your answer to the first bulette point on two attacks, it may be that all reference to parries should be deleted from that sentence entirely? Finally: on P200 Subsequent parries it clearly contradicts this "If the chance is reduced to 0% or below, the chance of success becomes the default 5% minimum chance of success."

Yes I agree. I was saying that you can ( in the same melee round) use parry and/or dodge multiple times, but not against the same attack. You could parry one attack then dodge the next, then parry a third. But there would be a cumulative - 20% penalty spread across both parries and dodges regardless of which defensive option you used.

I think the rules are clear that you can't both parry and dodge the same attack, you have to choose one or the other. "Dodge may be used to avoid an attack instead of attempting to parry." Dodge p201 I haven't come across anything specific in the text of RQG to say that with two weapon fighting you can't parry the same attack twice, and I've not seen that said in RQ2 either. For me it makes much more sense of the RQG ruling, and why you should give up your attack if you decide to parry twice using both weapons.

Excuse me while I think aloud: Heres the text from RQG again: "Any adventurer using a weapon in each hand may use them for two attacks, two parries, or one attack and one parry." p224 Two Weapon Use. With Two Weapon Fighting, you must choose between either two attacks or two parries (one of each with each weapon). This exception ruling is saying once you double up your attacks you must give up a parry option, and likewise once you double up your parries you must give up your attack option. Rightly or wrongly, the ruling is there to say that there is price to be paid for the privilege of doubling up your attacks or parries. However the standard option attack/parry option also remains. If you wish to parry once & attack once, you can ( and presumably its your choice whether you do this with just one of the weapons in hand, or use both). So what are the advantages of using Two Parries In the Two Weapon fighting rule? With Two weapon fighting the advantages of attacking twice are obvious, however the advantage of parrying twice with two weapons is more ambiguous, as the cumulative - 20% penalty applies across both weapons, and with a single weapon use you can already parry multiple attacks from different sources. So my thinking on the advantage's of parrying twice with two weapons is this: If you loose use of a weapon through damage, limb loss, fumble, or disarm. The option of parrying the same single attack twice. This also means that two successful parries could potentially do greater damage to the attacking weapon. (This is a point that would be well mentioned IMO in the section on Two Weapon Fighting, as I find it makes much more sense of the ruling - unless @Jason Durall corrects this point otherwise) Regarding Dodge and Two Weapon Fighting, I can't see anything mentioned in the text to say that it's use is limited in the same way as parry is in Two Weapon Fighting. It seems to be just the actions with the actual weapons that are subject to the limitation - Though if it is intended to be limited then I think the text needs to say so explicitly. So back To Mugen's questions, heres my take: -You can attack once with each weapon, but you can't parry or dodge. Yes, although as written i'd say you can still dodge -You can attack once with one weapon and parry with the other weapon as many times as your skill allows it. Yes -You can parry with both weapons as many times as your skill allows it, but you can't attack. Yes And dodge can be used as a replacement for any parry attempt. Yes, and subject to the same cumulative -20% penalty. You could mix and match. @Jason Durall Final clarification - Does the above sound Ok?

Thanks Jason. That’s straight forward. Less fiddly book keeping that way, and still feels right. I think quite a few of us picked up that there was no text to clarify this in the two weapon section. A previous bit of text in RQG (p200 subsequent parries) had suggested that the modifier was *per weapon* used, not *regardless* of which weapon used. Thanks for the clarification - and congrats on RQG it’s quite something

Thanks Jason. I’m a bit confused still. This reads like you’re talking about handiness, whether the weapon/shield is in the main hand or off hand. The original question was different and was regarding the RQG rules on two weapon use. I wanted to know whether the cumulative parry penalty is applied to each weapon individually, or Is applied to both simultaneously regardless of which of the two weapons has already been used to parry?

Yes I agree there is nothing broken about these rules. The “two weapon” Death Star is fully operational.

Having been one of the voices of criticism at the beginning of the thread, I now don’t think there is anything incorrect about these rules or the way the have been written. There’s a lot of thinking through and house rules here for sure but, I don’t think we can say that there is anything incorrect about the rules in this context. They appear to be written consistently - if I was to criticise the two weapon ruling, it would be that perhaps the rules should repeat for clarity how ruling for the cumulative parry penalty is applied - to both weapons together or each weapon individually?

Just to clarify, as I feel I may have sown a few seeds of doubt: Having reread the rules I feel this earlier observation of mine is wrong. It’s apparent there’s a design decision to balance out two weapon fighting by not allowing a parry if you make attacks with both weapons, and It’s also consistent with the other ruling on attacks with shields. So I retract that earlier criticism. It all makes sense!

I like that house rule - Though not to forget there’s now potential for augments in combat with passions and runes (+20%, or -10% is you mess up) So a few more tools to give you an edge in combat

Yes it does - just the shield Knockback is refered to in the section on shield attacks p219, which implies that it is an attack - meaning you can’t knockback and parry with the shield in the same melee round.

Sorry I didn’t mean to imply that you said that. Just pointing out that the rules as written allow dodge to be used with the 2 weapon rule, using two attacks. Which gives a defensive replacement for the disallowed parry. You can attack twice and dodge an unlimited number of attacks with the culamative - 20% penalty. No need to either attack or dodge, you can do both.

Yes, but in fairness RQG does acknowledge at the beginning of two weapon ruling, that it does not apply to shield and weapon use. Also thinking about it if you attack with a shield in RQG you loose the ability to parry, which echoes the two weapon ruling. This does seem intentional after all.

After rereading the rule I’m more inclined to see this as intentional design to keep a balance of sorts to two weapon use. An exception to the normal rule on parry

Edit: I had missed the two weapon rule that if you attack twice you loose parry. Yes it does seem counter intuitive to the the standard rule on parries in RQG. Perhaps that’s the price you have to pay for all out attacks with 2 weapons? Either that or it hasn’t been properly interpreted with the new rules? The plus is you can be a super parrier or super attacker. Just not both RAW Dodge is used instead of parry. It’s effective against all attacks that can be perceived. Though you have to roll separately against each, and as with parry with a cumulative - 20% after the first dodge. Theres nothing to say you can’t attack and dodge in the same round. Which I guess means good news for 2 weapon use. A two weapon user (RAW) would be able to attack twice and also dodge.

Yep. Thats my interpretation too.