> Generally it seems to be two identical weapons, two swords,
> two iron maces,
> two "hooks", etc. (See Crunchy Tiger, Fried Dragon for more examples.)
Miyamoto Musashi, of course, argues elegantly for the two-sword style.
I reckon that two identical weapons work better becuase the balance is the same and you can spend less time adjusting and thinking about your own movement, balance and behaviour.
I also think there should be no game mechanical effect for two weapon fighting, but I would allow cunning augments. I think the main effect of two-wepon styles in hero wars terms is to give you more opportunity to make convincing arguments to the GM, rather than a combat bonus or penalty.
Frex, if you were defending with a shield, the narration of exchanges might leave an opening you can exploit with your shield. The only difference with having another weapon is that you are more likely to score damage with your normal edge if you make a succesful atatck when offered this sort of opening. I don't think there needs to be a mechanical distinction any more than the distinction that already exists between sword & shield and spear & shield. An perfectly reasonable quivalent (for Dara Happans, maybe?) might be Rapier & Main Gauche, frex, or maybe "Sea Wolf Two-Axe Style" or whatever.
Of course, the down side is that if you need to take heavy defensive action, the Improv penalties are probably going to be large. So I think that if there is a mechanical difference between the two, it is that the two-weapon style is liable to greater defensive improv penalties at the GM's discretion.
Powered by hypermail