Limiting Paired Weapons.

[Veknironth]

Well, I stand here ready to take the slings and arrows of dissent, but hear me out. I've always thought that paired weapons was a little overpowered. I like that it creates a divide between MaA and non MaA (at least in 1E) but it seems too effective. I know people are going to mention requiring having a WP for each weapon you use in your paired weapons. I'm not talking about that, that's not really much of a limitation. Levi's idea of having to expend a skill for each combination is much better. (i.e. One skill for using a sword and shield, one for two swords, etc.) but that can still allow people to run around with twin battle axes.

So, my first suggestion is that using a twin strike should have both weapons do damage on a successful strike, but bonuses from H2H, OCC, or PS should not be doubled. I am particularly adamant about the PS not being doubled. It's really hard to generate your full strength with hip and shoulder rotation from both sides of your body. The problem is what do you do when you attack two separate targets? It's either split the damage (more math!) or you just pick one to focus on.

Second, and this is admittedly a stretch, there is the description of the skill in the books. On p46, main book, it states "Certain kinds of weapons, such as sais, nunchaku, knives, clubs and swords, can be used as paired weapons." So, that would seem to limit the type of weapon you could use. Then on p60 it states, "Weapons are limited to the one-handed types and can be used in any combination; for example, two short swords, or short sword and broadsword, sword and knife, mace and shield, etc." So, again it seems to be limited, but it also has the "one-handed types" and says etc. So, I am thinking you limit paired weapons to only the weapons listed as examples. That rules out the bigger, higher damaging weapons like mace and chain and the stupidly overpowered battle axe. You could have those weapons in hand, but not perform the special paired weapons maneuvers.

-Vek
"I guess I don't know my MFing Paired Weapons, my apologies Mr. Siembieda."

[kiralon]

I've always thought that paired weapons was a little overpowered.

Me too, so i added some negatives to it. For example you cannot do a twin strike with as much power as a single strike except for maybe a thrust. People are left or right handed so one hand will be worse than the other, a lot of this can be trained out but that is a lot of training a level 1 character will not have and using 2 weapons itself isn't easy. I do have a roll for ambidexterity that players can do if they like with some slight social effects if you are a lefty, but ambidexterity does reduce some of the negatives for using 2 weapons. The only exception is weapon and shield, which is exempted. I git rid of the palladium rules for paired weapons totally as they are a bit ridiculous as why wouldn't you go around simultaneous striking with 2 battle axes in every pc based fight.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Man-at-arms.....¿M@A?....using the 'at'/'@' symbol

Twin Strikes....each do damage on successful normal strike roll(s)...yes. nothing is doubled except damage on the strike that rolled a nat20.
PS bonus....*shrugs* It is more like the person just does that much more damage without really trying. I wouldn't let a player do a power punch or other more than regular full strike damage along with a paired attack with the other hand.
What you described is the full bare handed attack damage or the weapon damage base values.

What weapons...basically what it says, any one-handed weapon can be paired with any other one-handed weapon. You as the GM get final say on what works and what doesn't.

[Nekira Sudacne]

Well, I stand here ready to take the slings and arrows of dissent, but hear me out. I've always thought that paired weapons was a little overpowered. I like that it creates a divide between MaA and non MaA (at least in 1E) but it seems too effective. I know people are going to mention requiring having a WP for each weapon you use in your paired weapons. I'm not talking about that, that's not really much of a limitation. Levi's idea of having to expend a skill for each combination is much better. (i.e. One skill for using a sword and shield, one for two swords, etc.) but that can still allow people to run around with twin battle axes.

So, my first suggestion is that using a twin strike should have both weapons do damage on a successful strike, but bonuses from H2H, OCC, or PS should not be doubled. I am particularly adamant about the PS not being doubled. It's really hard to generate your full strength with hip and shoulder rotation from both sides of your body. The problem is what do you do when you attack two separate targets? It's either split the damage (more math!) or you just pick one to focus on.

Second, and this is admittedly a stretch, there is the description of the skill in the books. On p46, main book, it states "Certain kinds of weapons, such as sais, nunchaku, knives, clubs and swords, can be used as paired weapons." So, that would seem to limit the type of weapon you could use. Then on p60 it states, "Weapons are limited to the one-handed types and can be used in any combination; for example, two short swords, or short sword and broadsword, sword and knife, mace and shield, etc." So, again it seems to be limited, but it also has the "one-handed types" and says etc. So, I am thinking you limit paired weapons to only the weapons listed as examples. That rules out the bigger, higher damaging weapons like mace and chain and the stupidly overpowered battle axe. You could have those weapons in hand, but not perform the special paired weapons maneuvers.

-Vek
"I guess I don't know my MFing Paired Weapons, my apologies Mr. Siembieda."

Remember, doing a double-strike means losing their parry. A lot of people seem to forget this, but it's there for a reason.

All you really need is an enemy who's tanky enough to take a double-hit and hit back hard with a simultanious attack. Once you tell them they get hit automatically because the only way to parry a simultanious attack is to have paired weapons but to have one reserved for parrying.

Then in the same turn, have other bad guys also all gang up on the one who's obviously overextended. they won't be able to parry any of them.

Assuming the character survives, they should learn the lesson.

There are many unbalanced things in Palladium, but paried weapons isn't actually one of them. If you remember that the bad guys can exploit a character who's overextended.

[kiralon]

Then in the same turn, have other bad guys also all gang up on the one who's obviously overextended. they won't be able to parry any of them.

1st ed version seems to point at losing auto parry for the round (but doesn't actually say either), the second ed version specifically says opponent's next attack, so it is only the next attack that is the issue.

Point 4 in the WP description is interesting, it says you can parry 2 different attackers, one with each hand.
Is this a redundant statement, or does it mean autoparry only works against one opponent, or can you attack simultaneously with a friend to deny parries so they have to dodge?

Many an argument has been had over paired weapons.

[Hotrod]

In rules as written, it's hard to top the melee potency of a character with W.P. Battle Axe and W.P. Paired Weapons. Without any damage bonuses, that's a whopping 8D6 per dual strike, and any damage bonuses get applied per weapon, so they effectively count double. Axes have fewer bonuses for parrying, but damage and the ability to do simultaneous strikes/parries against poor sods without paired weapons make this approach's benefits far outweigh the costs.

By rules as written, paired weapons have better combat moves and do more damage than 2-handers. Paired weapons do more damage than a weapon/shield combination and are just as defensively viable (more so in many cases). Paired weapons' ability to simultaneously attack/parry confer an enormous

There are other approaches that can do even more damage, but not many, and they tend to have lots of caveats or conditions.

This is one of many reasons why I came up with my "How to make Melee Equipment Choices More Interesting" house rules thread. I did include some limitations on Paired Weapons as a W.P.:

W.P. Paired Weapons now it starts out as a single combination of weapons (sword and sword, whip and knife, axe and short spear, et cetera), and it adds a new combination of weapons every other level.W.P. Paired Weapons also now allows you to entangle with one weapon and strike with the other. The Paired Weapons that comes with some hand-to-hand skills is for a single specific combination of weapons only (chosen by the player), and does not allow for additional combinations as the skill does.

(Note: I mention this elsewhere, but these rules also make W.P. Paired Weapons exclusive to men-at-arms; men-at-arms can only take a W.P. if they have a non-combat skill that uses a particular type of weapon as a tool)

That said, I think there's a deeper issue here. My problem isn't with Paired Weapons per se; it's that there's generally no mechanically interesting reason for any character not to take paired weapons when they have the option. Thus, rather than nerfing Paired Weapons, I'd prefer to adjust the rules in order to make 2-handers or weapon/shield combos into mechanically viable alternatives to Paired Weapons, each with their own situational strengths and weaknesses.

[Fenris2020]

I have no problem with it as it stands.
I know people who know the WP in real life (I'm working on it), and it's amazing to watch (and spar with them).