RQ2/RQ3 : 2 weapons & 2 attacks in the same round?

[Al.]

On 10/1/2016 at 6:50 AM, Mugen said:

Concerning Japan, Dual wielding was definitely not common, and especially on the battlefield. Prior to the Edo period, the main weapon of the samurai was the bow, then the lance. The katana was a close defense weapon, and a secondary one on the battlefield.

Didn't Miyamoto (sp) Mushashi (sp) develop his Ni-To-Kenjutsu style (duel-wielding Katana and Wakizashi) in response to seeing Western (Portuguese?) fighting with Rapier and Left-hand Dagger?

I'm sure that I've got an old copy of 'Tales of Japan' which refers to Saborai fencing with Sword and Dirk. i.e. using contemporary Western terms for Nipponese arms. And I'm certain that Nippon's greatest swordsman did similar: used his familiar weapons to emulate a culturally alien style.

 

Al

[RosenMcStern]

56 minutes ago, Al. said:

Didn't Miyamoto (sp) Mushashi (sp) develop his Ni-To-Kenjutsu style (duel-wielding Katana and Wakizashi) in response to seeing Western (Portuguese?) fighting with Rapier and Left-hand Dagger?

He did, and very few emulated him. In any case, Musashi's style requires room, which is exactly what you lack on the battlefield. Standard Kenjutsu stance is still usable in close formation, but not if you dual wield.

The key point that some posters made but not everyone grasped, is that some of the dual wielding techniques and moves are not so fit for a cramped battle theater. Unless your second weapon is a shield, which you keep closer to your body and is less likely to injure your comrades. Shields were absolutely the best choice. In field battles.

[MJ Sadique]

I don't agree ! Shinmen Musashi didn't develop his school teaching after looking at western style. He firstly used this his long and short sword after an incident... An embush by numerous enemies (~60). Musashi tell himself that he was surround by numerous groups of enemies and try using his two sword to keep them at distance and control his and their maai. After this big fight against multiples groups of enemies, he think that his tactic/strategy was good and that he may need it in future. Musashi was a strategist first (his motto could be strategy first !).

His book, the Go Rin no Sho (always next to my bed) don't speak a lot about the Niten Ryû (Way of two heaven) but mostly speak about strategy and emphasis the fact that "long sword is best" is a mistake, as long "short sword only" is no good. He was the best bushi in history not for his fighting abilities but also because he was a strategist, a poet, a master at calligraphy and many others arts ("You must embrace all arts, not only one" he said). One could say : "Adaptability and Strategy are his first teaching, this is why he create a school teaching dual wielding as much as any others style".

History will prove he was right in his next battles. He and his adopted son had achieve great victories on the field using the long and short sword. The fact is that wielding a katana with one arm is hard and need a lot of training and strength (himself was ridiculously strong, almost not human).

Battle don't append in crowded places but in open field ! Not all battle are phalanx vs phalanx. If battle were in crowded places, no one will use spears and halberd. If you can use a spear or a long sword you can use two swords because dual wielder don't use open arms forms to create a large maai unless you need to force enemies stay at distance. And for the septic : Krabi Krabong users use reverse grip and are close-combat fighter (Muay Boran and thai is deadly in melee and more in close combat).

[Mugen]

19 hours ago, Al. said:

Didn't Miyamoto (sp) Mushashi (sp) develop his Ni-To-Kenjutsu style (duel-wielding Katana and Wakizashi) in response to seeing Western (Portuguese?) fighting with Rapier and Left-hand Dagger?

I never heard of that, and I doubt Musashi saw a lot of Europeans show their sword fighting techniques in the context of the Edo period, honestly. Samurai in the Edo period wore the daishô, so it sounds logical some tried to use the second blade in some occasions. And others did before him, actually.

Anyway, my intention was to point out that, during the time where warfare was common (that is, before Edo period and Musashi's career), the main weapon of the samurai was not the sword (or swords) but the lance.

Edited October 4, 2016 by Mugen

[RosenMcStern]

31 minutes ago, Mugen said:

I never heard of that, and I doubt Musashi saw a lot of Europeans show their sword fighting techniques in the context of the Edo period, honestly. Samurai in the Edo period wore the daishô, so it sounds logical some tried to use the second blade in some occasions. And others did before him, actually.

Anyway, my intention was to point out that, during the time where warfare was common (that is, before Edo period and Musashi's career), the main weapon of the samurai was not the sword (or swords) but the lance.

Musashi began his career in the Sengoku period, and saw only the early years of the Edo era. Samurai did not start wearing the dai-sho on the dai after Sekigahara.

Before the Edo period, most warriors used the Yari (spear) but the Tachi was rather common, too. The passage from the prevalence of long weapons to medium ones must have been rather gradual. And ashigaru continued to use the Yari.

[Mugen]

1 hour ago, RosenMcStern said:

Musashi began his career in the Sengoku period, and saw only the early years of the Edo era.

According to wikipedia, Musashi, born in 1584, was 16 at Sekigahara, and he died at age 61, in 1645.

Sure, Edo jidai lasted for more than 2 centuries after his death, but he spent the most part of his life and career in this era.

1 hour ago, RosenMcStern said:

Samurai did not start wearing the dai-sho on the dai after Sekigahara.

I never said that.

1 hour ago, RosenMcStern said:

The passage from the prevalence of long weapons to medium ones must have been rather gradual.

It was a consequence of the fact Edo period was much more peaceful than the previous centuries. You can't carry a lance with you as easily as a katana.

Edited October 4, 2016 by Mugen

[fulk]

Rapiers were most certainly NOT super weapons piercing through plate armor and driving it off the field.  Rapiers were known to snap against plate.  Side swords, rapiers and small swords were all civilian weapons, not intended for use on the battle field by or against heavily armed troops.  Nobles and officers might still carry a rapier or lighter sword as a secondary or tertiary weapon, but in many cases the sword was more of a symbol of rank than a primary weapon. Certainly through the mid 1500, longswords (hand-and-a-half) were still one of the primary weapons carried by the upper classes.  Infantry might carry a shorter sword (eg katzbalger) as a secondary weapon but their main weapons were either 2H or missiles.    

By the mid to end of the 15C (in Europe) plate armor gave good defense against longbows and crossbows.  For example, it was common to 'proof' a breast plate against crossbows.  A longbow might pierce plate at close range but not at long range. For example, at the Battle of Flodden Field, the Scotts front ranks were mostly nobles and knights in full plate.  English longbows did little damage against them as they advanced.  In close quarters the English Bill did the damage and the English won (pikes and halberds being the continental mainstay). 

Muskets and black powder were certainly important in driving heavy armor off the battle field.  Regarding cavalry, the development of the wheellock pistol around 1540 seems to be the tipping point for a number of reasons.  For one, at close range, they could penetrate lighter armor and certainly kill horses.  Second, lighter cavalry required less expensive horses making it easier to recruit reiter-like cavalry than heavy lancers.  

 

 

 

[MJ Sadique]

5 hours ago, RosenMcStern said:

Musashi began his career in the Sengoku period, and saw only the early years of the Edo era. Samurai did not start wearing the dai-sho on the dai after Sekigahara.

Before the Edo period, most warriors used the Yari (spear) but the Tachi was rather common, too. The passage from the prevalence of long weapons to medium ones must have been rather gradual. And ashigaru continued to use the Yari.

For katana-wakizachi pair, they were made long before Sekigahara, centuries to speak...For brief history of bushi's weapon, sparring you dates :

Early, primitive age : The Japanese warriors main weapon were yumi (asymetrical bow). Spears and swords were rares and for wars only. This period set the Daikyû (Long yumi) to be their primary skill for the next millenia. The legendary Empress Jingū-kōgō.

• Best Dual weapon : Daikyû, as a Bow and Shurikens (arrow heads are set on arrow at the last moment, sometimes used as shurikens)

The Bushi periods : During the foundation of major clan, the warrior because a bushi (man-of-war, and man of arts) specialized to fight horseback. Daikyû still remains the main weapon but Tachi (long) and Kodachi (short) were the main swords and spears mostly used for defence or unmounted fight greatly progress and arise as Bushi second best duelling weapons. This is the era of Nasu no Suketaka Yoichi, the legendary archer.

• Best Dual weapon : Tachi + Tanto (in battle) and then Kodachi + Tessen (in door use).

The Glorious period, Golden age of Bushido : This period remain mostly under bow and cavalry domination. As the Bushi separate into two caste Buke (the warrior) and Kuge (Noble). Development of weapons follow the domination of each caste : Spears and tachi/kodachi in war periods by Buke and the born of Katana / wakizachi used by Kuge in period of peace. This period  was ended at the era of the glorious and rivals daimyo Uesugi Kenshin and Shingen Takeda. (mainly Long sword and Naginata users).

• Best Dual weapon : too much weapons but I will bet on Kurasigama / kyoketsu shoge ( sickle and chain used by paysans and ninja ).

The periods of the three daimyo : This period start with Nobunaga, the very first to massively use Ashigeru and samurai (who are low rank warrior). He clearly ended the Medieval period of japan by destroying the cavalry domination with great use of crossbow, firearms and every European weapons and tactics he could use. This is the Era of Shinmen Musashi, the best bushi.

At this time katana were more produce than tachi since 200 years but as the still be used a lot of tachi were converted as katana and sometimes even reconverted as cavalry sword. Bushi oftenly possess tachi & kodachi as well as a katana & wakisachi, using the first in wars periods, the later in peace ones.

• Best Dual weapon : Katana and wakizachi then Katana + Bajōzutsu (black powder matchlock, really loved by Nobunaga).

The End of the bushido : This the period of the Shinsengumi (blue men division) were civil wars arise more than ever in a unified japon. This period was under the domination of katana and wakizachi but a lot of great spears users still remain. This era ended with The last bushi : Hajime Saito, the only one who still used Katana (alone and left-handed) on the battlefield when all others soldiers was using occidentals swords.

• Best Dual weapon : In the vast arsenal of the The Bugei Juhappan (Eighteen bushido martial arts), I'll personally choose a Kodachi and the metal scabbard. Highest solidity, defense and best speed in drawing techniques iaijutsu (focus on always be aware) or battojutsu (focus at the art of sword drawing). And easiest to carry !

 

Daisho : long-short are made of any pair of sword. Tachi+Kodachi coexist with Katana + Wakizachi for more five centuries of Wars and Peace.

 

 

[Mugen]

I'm tempted to answer MJ Sadique's post, but I think we should stop this digression about Japan.

[Haimji]

On 05/10/2016 at 8:04 AM, Mugen said:

I'm tempted to answer MJ Sadique's post, but I think we should stop this digression about Japan.

Unless you want to talk about "Land of Ninja" and combat rules with 2 weapons.

[0xal0t]

On 9/21/2016 at 10:44 PM, MJ Sadique said:

You're not **really** mistaken : the problem with every skill's description is : it just describe the basic meaning and usage of a skill. In reality, Nito kenjutsu is used in a more vast way and a lot of fighting skill in Land Of Ninja are under-rated because you cannot explain in few words what niten ryu justu is in reality (it's the GM job to fill the blanks). Let me clarify this, most techniques skills in the main book have 3 avantages (martial art () : give double kick damage, double foot damage & double AP on parry) but Nitokenjustsu give only use 2H weapon as 1H weapon & Use weapon with left arm with no malus. For myself I give it what it really mean and limit it's acquisition as being part of the Niten ryû school ! it's my way to fill the blank.

In the theme of thread "2 weapons => 2-attacks-in-the-same-round" you need too skills main_weapon (right hand) + main_weapon (left hand) or in the Land of Ninja way : Main weapon + Two swords usage skill. The latter is simplier, more manageable and also more logic if you often use two weapons. Don't forget that in RQ and Basic, creating a new skill is possible, it's part of the system, the problem is to not create a broken or "duplicate skill that already exist".

In the skill descriptions in the land of the Ninja supplement it explains that kenjutsu uses both hands in the act of combat (more a hand and a half) in that most strikes in classic fighting as such it recognises that any strike using a katana etc for a nihonese character single handed will suffer a 10% skill penalty. 

The development of Ni to kenjutsu by Musashi was not widely picked up at the time. As such the skill for dual wielding is a new skill (non cultural) with a base of 5% to be developed independently. In making a second attack with your dual wielded sword it will occur 3 strike ranks after your initial attack SR. If you can find a teacher this is easy to develop fast but it is not culturally accepted until late in the settings for Jpan that you would normally play. Given that most alt Earth games are very anachronistic (romans greeks egyptians mongols Asterix and Obleix and vikings all around at the same time as Charlemagne and the crusades leaves a bit of leeway to make a renowned teacher to become available to train the skill)

PS It also states that it only applies to Katana, Ninjato and Wakiizashi (and inferred would be a training bokken) as they are the weapons covered under Kenjutsu.

All other weapons use standard RQ rules. 

As far as repetitive ki attacks these can only be done with a jo stick and nunchaku. he spends 1 pt ki on his initial attack and iff successful can hit again 1 Sr later until completing SR10. To do so he has to successfully roll his attack ki roll on each attack to do so. As ki starts at 5% and does not add your manipulation modifier to this starting number you have to train a while or be very successful very often to get this to ki master state when you are likely to be able to hit regularly. Given the average Melee SR in Nihon is 5 then most attacks would start on SR6 for a developed toon or 7 for an average toon giving a max of 4 or 5 attacks. still bloody impressive.

I saw an earlier post about the 3 SR to ready a weapon and the same gap being between missile attacks. A melee round is 12 seconds is RQ3. While it recognises that there are lots of feints etc in a round the simple philosophy is that an averagely competent toon will generate 1 scoring attack with 1 hand in the round (not that that is all the movements that they make but one effective strike) it also recognises that at 100% or you can split attacks if you have the SRs to do so. with it recognising that my 6foot 6 mate has a greater reach than my 6'1", but that my little speedy 3rd dan mate has hands so quick I will always take multiple hits while i try to grapple him with his greater Int and Dex making him better technically than me and also a faster learner from his training. (read manipulation bonus. My agility sucks compared to him but if I hit him with one clean hit he will 1 fly through the air  and 2 not get up. thus recognising Str+siz vs Siz+Dex and damage mods mine being 1d6 vs his zero. (why? because unless I miss my parry he does no damage vs every time i kick him he flies back 2m)

The Missile ranks allow for a toon to draw, aim, fire, draw aim, fire represented in the round that the higher dex will get off the faster shot. Not unreasonable. While other techniques have been developed by say the mongols the elves or ninja you can see in history that very few cultures and even in those cultures that did develop techniques very few were raised to excellence. So for a system that needed to introduce a game mechanic and speaking from 23 years shooting and 21 of martial arts I thinking the system as written is fair (taking 3.6 seconds and my dex rank to pull an arrow from the quiver, nock it, draw aim and to release in 12 seconds), so a dex 20 archer loosing 3 full power accurate shots in 12 seconds is bloody deadly because shooters with semi auto rifles struggle to do so now.

Remember the rules represent the average or normal system. If you want to develop a skill that represents a technique then use the existing rules to do so fairly but keep it fair. 

The rules state that the best an archer can shoot is based on 1/SR being 1/5/9 and when you think that he can fell 3 foes in 12 seconds he would make a good mate for Legolas, any other system would be a new technique to develop by the player starting at 5%plus manipulation mod as per Ni to Kenjutsu

 

Edited December 13, 2016 by 0xal0t

[styopa]

For that matter, one might plausibly wonder why there are two different 'methods' for missile and melee weapon initiative?  The hand-wavy bit about "well in melee there are all sorts of feints and such" works for D&D but has always seemed awkward here.  (Not to mention the complete absence of skill improving the speed of a character's attack which is pretty clearly IRL true.)

(I've always allowed characters to spend their attack% as 'feinting' which directly deducts from their opponent's defense vs that attack; obviously it's mainly of value to attackers with over 96% attack, where the loss of % is only hurting their chance of special/crit.)

At least in RQ most missile weapons were given the (2) S/MR or (3) 1/SR speed, meaning you could (if they were handy) toss throwing axes, darts, or rocks just as fast as you could shoot arrows. (Oddly javelins were 1/MR while slings were S/MR, which IMO should be reversed.)

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, styopa said:

For that matter, one might plausibly wonder why there are two different 'methods' for missile and melee weapon initiative?  The hand-wavy bit about "well in melee there are all sorts of feints and such" works for D&D but has always seemed awkward here.  (Not to mention the complete absence of skill improving the speed of a character's attack which is pretty clearly IRL true.)

Probably because a person can fire a readied missile weapon such as a bow, crossbow, or firearm faster than someone can attack with a readied melee weapon. . Unless the misile user has some kind of physical handicap, fumbles his weapon,  or gets distracted, he's going to get the attack of first, all the time. I saw something awhile back where they showed how it is virtually impossible to jump someone who "has the drop on you" without their getting a shot off. Throw missile weapons are a bit slower to release, but that is made up for by the time it would take for the opponent to close. 

Now after the first missile attack, it's a different story. Reading the second arrow, aiming, and getting off a shot isn't going to be all that much faster than attacking  a sword or spear. Probably the reverse. Especially if you can't really look at what you are doing, and can't really defend too well against a melee weapon with just a bow. 

 

The "feints & things" really keeps this from going into a series of 1SR melee rounds. But, in a real fight a lot of attacks are going to be compound attacks, as it is pretty easy to block or parry a weapon otherwise. 

[RosenMcStern]

2 hours ago, styopa said:

For that matter, one might plausibly wonder why there are two different 'methods' for missile and melee weapon initiative?  The hand-wavy bit about "well in melee there are all sorts of feints and such" works for D&D but has always seemed awkward here.  (Not to mention the complete absence of skill improving the speed of a character's attack which is pretty clearly IRL true.)

The quick (and probably true, but we are not in his mind, so who knows?) answer: Steve had probably more experience with melee in the SCA than with ranged weapons, so the round structure revolves around close combat.

The more thought of answer: an archer, even an unskilled one, is more likely to fire at two or more different targets in one round than a swordsman is. And there is the non-trivial problem of ammunitiion. All this mandates rules that keep track of every individual round fired for ranged combat, whereas this is absolutely not necessary for melee.

[SDLeary]

6 hours ago, styopa said:

For that matter, one might plausibly wonder why there are two different 'methods' for missile and melee weapon initiative?  The hand-wavy bit about "well in melee there are all sorts of feints and such" works for D&D but has always seemed awkward here.  (Not to mention the complete absence of skill improving the speed of a character's attack which is pretty clearly IRL true.)

Because with a melee weapon, the size of the person matters? Because SIZ includes the height component, it also affects reach, and thus which weapon should strike first.

You can be Bilbo, or you can be Thrud, but the mechanical function of a missile weapon is the same and SIZ really doesn't com into it. Damage for thrown weapons of course being the exception.

SDLeary

[Yelm's Light]

14 hours ago, styopa said:

(Not to mention the complete absence of skill improving the speed of a character's attack which is pretty clearly IRL true.)

It's a kind of negative scale.  The weapon has a certain inherent speed, and a lot of people picking it up for the first time will be clumsy with it and slow that down.  But others that are untrained will be able to pick it up, test the balance for a few seconds, and use it at nearly the optimum speed.  Training doesn't make the weapon any faster; it only makes you faster with the weapon, up to the point where everyone is pretty much the same speed with it, not taking into account personal (physical) speed.  I guess you could base some kind of DEX modifier on that, but I don't see how it jibes much with reality or adds anything other than an extra step in the calculation.

[RosenMcStern]

8 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

It's a kind of negative scale.  The weapon has a certain inherent speed, and a lot of people picking it up for the first time will be clumsy with it and slow that down.  But others that are untrained will be able to pick it up, test the balance for a few seconds, and use it at nearly the optimum speed.  Training doesn't make the weapon any faster; it only makes you faster with the weapon, up to the point where everyone is pretty much the same speed with it, not taking into account personal (physical) speed.  I guess you could base some kind of DEX modifier on that, but I don't see how it jibes much with reality or adds anything other than an extra step in the calculation.

This has been explained very well by the "nomad experts" of this board: the extra speed is due to peculiar techniques in reloading that only specialised archers in cultures that base their military on archery may know and use. Nothing that a hunter (who does not get to fire another arrow at that deer if he misses the first one) may know, despite being very accurate with his weapon, simply because it is a battlefield technique that is useful only in that specific context.

[styopa]

34 minutes ago, RosenMcStern said:

This has been explained very well by the "nomad experts" of this board: the extra speed is due to peculiar techniques in reloading that only specialised archers in cultures that base their military on archery may know and use. Nothing that a hunter (who does not get to fire another arrow at that deer if he misses the first one) may know, despite being very accurate with his weapon, simply because it is a battlefield technique that is useful only in that specific context.

I was specifically talking about melee weapons at that point, actually.  

 

8 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

It's a kind of negative scale.  The weapon has a certain inherent speed, and a lot of people picking it up for the first time will be clumsy with it and slow that down.  But others that are untrained will be able to pick it up, test the balance for a few seconds, and use it at nearly the optimum speed.  Training doesn't make the weapon any faster; it only makes you faster with the weapon, up to the point where everyone is pretty much the same speed with it, not taking into account personal (physical) speed.  I guess you could base some kind of DEX modifier on that, but I don't see how it jibes much with reality or adds anything other than an extra step in the calculation.

Yes, one could absolutely look at it like that.  In fact, is probably one of the core differences that the varying base skill% is trying to get it, rationalized into a single number.  A high base skill would be a weapon that takes little analysis/practice to use (or for which analysis/practice doesn't improve it much), while a low base skill is likely a weapon that requires a fair amount of experience or training to be using 'at full speed'.

And I'm not going to repost his video, but Lindybeige makes a pretty cogent argument that whether you look at it as a speed penalty that goes away over increased skill, or as a speed improvement that goes with skill, a skilled user of a weapon is markedly faster in employing that weapon than a beginner.

[Yelm's Light]

Yeah, missile weapons are entirely different.  They're definitely an acquired skill.  I should've been clearer that I was referring to melee weapons.

On (yet) another side note, anybody notice that the Glorantha and RQ forums got promoted above CoC?  Not that I'm complaining, I'm fine with it.

Edited December 14, 2016 by Yelm's Light

[MJ Sadique]

In general terms, missile and melee weapons are truly different but about speed and skill, it's almost the same principle :
-Once accustomed to use a certain weapon, The global time of executing a technique is about the same for everyone.
-The gain of time (that most see as speed) is due to a more efficient movement. The less useless movement/hesitation done, the more time gain.
-The principle of a technique is to use peculiar sequence of movement to achieve greater effectiveness.

I'm not a expert fighter myself but with identical physical abilities, a runner or formula one driver are state faster not only because of physical prowess but because they do less useless movement.
Exemple : I remember a reportage about Olympics athletes who are trained to stay at their best but get better results by video-analysing their movement and correcting them; and the best part of it was a camera-man, a runner with a solid-built, who was used as guinea pig : In one day of training, he almost get 1-2s on a 200m runs; In term of distance, he could have gain almost 10 meters. you can't say he get physically better or simply faster in one day but more efficient and skilled YES !

In terms of gameplay, a better skill and technique can make you faster but our dear rules states DEX is the only. Magic in RuneQuest is the only actual way to boost your Dex to have a best DEX.SR.
-Like Yelm's light said an "an extra step in the calculation" don't seem to be the best solution. SR is enough complex to add a Skill part modifier !
-RosenMcStern sharpely say that it's " it is a battlefield technique that is useful only in that specific context. " And it's Land of Ninja answer to get faster with Iaijutsu : a specific technique. Not the best best simple and efficient without extra calculations.
-Styopa idea could be extrapolate as "sacrificing skill to gain" time of execution. It is the most fair way.

In magic 2 Pts DEX bonus = 1 SR bonus & 1 CAR ~ 5% we could make 1SR bonus equal 10% under some conditions or 20% without them. I'm not very fond of house rules or new skills but I always fell that RQ miss techniques and maneuvers. Not like D&D/anima where you have a "spell book" for warrior but something more open and flexible. a bit like the new "using your Rune" where you only need having a Rune + some MP to boost a skill; simple and sharp !

[styopa]

10 hours ago, MJ Sadique said:

The less useless movement/hesitation done, the more time gain.

Tangentially, what I believe is happening is more muscle memory than anything else.  Repeat practice with anything actually strengthens brain dendrites along the necessary pathways, technically making the brain work less, delay less (even internally) executing sets of actions.  

Think about someone with 30 years driving experience vs a new driver: even if the new driver knows intellectually how to handle a skid, for example, they have to think it through to get the desired results.  Someone with decades of driving experience automatically steers into the skid without *really* even conscious thought until it's practically over.

This doesn't really have a RULES application, it's just an observation.

[Atgxtg]

I was working on a BRP variant that addressed skill in terms of initiative order/first strike. What I did was use a skill roll with the 10s digit read as the strike order (higher was better). I also factored in for weapon length/reach with each decimeter of reach worth a +10% to skill (so each meter was worth an extra 100%). It wasn't all that bad of a method. 

[Atgxtg]

21 hours ago, styopa said:

Tangentially, what I believe is happening is more muscle memory than anything else.  Repeat practice with anything actually strengthens brain dendrites along the necessary pathways, technically making the brain work less, delay less (even internally) executing sets of actions.  

Think about someone with 30 years driving experience vs a new driver: even if the new driver knows intellectually how to handle a skid, for example, they have to think it through to get the desired results.  Someone with decades of driving experience automatically steers into the skid without *really* even conscious thought until it's practically over.

This doesn't really have a RULES application, it's just an observation.

Or how time seems to slow down for an experienced race driver. 

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

Hi all,

Thought this would be the relevant place to get clarity on a ruling of 2 weapon use in Runequest classic.

I've been revisiting the rule book, and finding that I'm not entirely clear on a ruling. On p29 of the classic Runequest,  the rules for Two Weapon Use continue, and point 6 has a bit of ambiguity for me:

In particular the last sentence of  point 6 which states

Quote

"Or he may attack one at 1/2attack ability with one weapon and the other at 1/2 attack ability with that weapon and with full ability with the other weapon"

Am I right in thinking that this is saying that one of the weapons can be used to as a split attack( page 26 classic Runequest), to attack 2 separate opponents, following which the second weapon can  attack normally at full percentage on one of these multiple opponents? Is this suggesting that providing there is sufficient strike ranks, a two weapon users can potentially have 3 attacks,but not 4? So in other words splitting the second weapon attack is not allowed in the RQ2 rules?

 

[Yelm's Light]

My takeaway from that is that you can make 4 attacks only in the second case (2 foes twice at 1/2 percentage each), SR allowing.