dual wield and chance

This goes back to what some of us had already come down to:

For DW: restrict just to Heroes, Hired Swords, and Large Henchmen

For Armor, use the below:

Shield, 5gc, 6+ AS (+1 AS in HtH when combined with any body armor)
Light Armor, 12gc, 6+ AS
Heavy Armor, 30gc, 5+ AS (-1 Move when used with Shield)
Full Plate, 60gc, 4+ AS (-1 Move regardless whether used with Shield)
Ithilmar Armor, 90gc, 5+ AS
Gromril Armor, 150, 4+ AS

This reduces cost for Light and Heavy, and adds Fulls Plate for a more affordable 4+ AS, and gives an additional +1 HtH AS for any armor/shield combo.

I've never liked what the armor-piercing abilities of high Strength does to armor in Mordheim either, but the above should help (particularly the shield+armor combo bump), without changing some core rules.

Full Plate, 60gc, 4+ AS (-1 Move regardless whether used with Shield) and if you combine this with shield, should that be a -2 movement?


and how about a skills under strength that enables armor?

Paluke wrote:

Full Plate, 60gc, 4+ AS (-1 Move regardless whether used with Shield) and if you combine this with shield, should that be a -2 movement?

Full Plate with shield would still be -1 Move. (The line "...regardless whether used with Shield.") If we make an armor move penalty of -2, we're back in the same boat as the Pavise. Did anyone ever use a Pavise?

Paluke wrote:

and how about a skills under strength that enables armor?

Which specific Strength skills are you referring to? Model abilities (such as Vomit Attack, Well 'Ard, Dwarves' Armor ability) would function as normal and need no changes (which is one of the appeals of this setup).

I did forget to restate one thing we'd put in before - an Armor Save roll of 1 always fails.

So, where do weapons that come in pairs (fighting claws) fit into all this?

My take at the armour issue goes as follow, hoping it's of any use to the debate:

- Shield: 5gc; +1 AS always; additional +1 AS in CC (or if paired with ANY weapon, not just 1h weapons, which are not classified as of now);

- Buckler: 5gc; Parry; additional +1 AS in CC (or as above);

- Light Armour: 10gc; 6+ AS; 6+ Save vs Seroius Injuries;

- Heavy Armour: 25gc (20gc?); 5+ AS; 5+ Save vs Seroius Injuries; -1 Initiave Tests (such as climbing);

- Full Plate Armour: 50gc; 4+ AS; 4+ Save vs Serious Injuries; -2 Initiative test; -1 Movement on foot (not when mounted);

- Helmet: 5gc, as is (could be interesting an upgraded type of helmet at 10gc, such as visored or full helm...);

- NO Toughened Leathers, assimilated into Light Armour;

- Middenheimer Wolf Pelt: +1 AS vs shooting only.

Also, I won't really restrict DW to heroes, biggies and HSs; as we "GWers" are used (but this is just an example of a greater issue) to see those militia regiments armed with whatever crap they can find, plus it is quite established that DW means more attacks in GW games...

What about a simple -2 to hit with off-hand weapon (WS3 vs WS3 means hit on 5+)? Of course skills can be introduced to have effective dual wielders in a band, having both the feeling of poor crap wielders (like fanatics) and professionals skirmishers with more killing efficency (like mercenary "swordsmen" which IMO should be allowed to choose a combat or strength skill of their liking...).

Well, I hope this is of any use, a good input.
For me it's mostly pointing out the direction I'd like the "DW & Armour" issues was going to take...

Cheers!!!

Matumaros wrote:

or if paired with ANY weapon, not just 1h weapons, which are not classified as of now

I cannot agree, as the shield cannot be used in HtH with a 2h weapon.

I also understand why many are talking about weapon+shield giving the combo, since that's the WFB way, but I still advocate for shield+armor giving the combo instead, as a way to make armor more attractive.

Matumaros wrote:

Buckler: 5gc; Parry; additional 1 AS in CC (or as above);

Since buckler gives Parry, I don't think it should go beyond +1 AS HtH for a combo - in other words, a buckler shouldn't give a +AS by itself in any case.

Matumaros wrote:

Also, I won't really restrict DW to heroes, biggies and HSs; as we "GWers" are used (but this is just an example of a greater issue) to see those militia regiments armed with whatever crap they can find, plus it is quite established that DW means more attacks in GW games...

However, Mordheim, due to XP advances, is a different animal. High Strength just eats through armor. DW is so cheap and avaiable, it's almost gimp not to take it. If you saw your entire WFB army almost constantly made up of DW mainline troops, would that feel right? That's the situation we have in Mordheim. In WFB, it sounds like DW is restricted to certin unit types - why not do the same in Mordheim?

Matumaros wrote:

What about a simple -2 to hit with off-hand weapon (WS3 vs WS3 means hit on 5 )? Of course skills can be introduced to have effective dual wielders in a band, having both the feeling of poor crap wielders (like fanatics) and professionals skirmishers with more killing efficency (like mercenary "swordsmen" which IMO should be allowed to choose a combat or strength skill of their liking...).

WS3 vs WS3 would mean 6+. WS4 vs WS3 would mean 5+. Maybe this is a middle ground between a -1 WS and my suggestion of 6+ regardless of WS. It would give higer WS models a benefit, but would keep attacker's with <1/2 defender's WS out (requiring a 7+ to hit without other modifiers).

I think paired weapons should be penalized, but Skills and model's Special Rules which allow an off-hand effect (like Tail-Figthing and Mutations) would work normally. Another skill which should include the allowace for dual-wield is the Pit Fighter's Arms Master, as this skill would be useless without allowing dual-wield.

There are so many options available regarding what to do with DWing.

As long as it's Simple, Statistically balanced and connects to the WFB in some vague form for continuity, all is well.

My vote continues to be along two lines

#1: Dungeons and Dragons 4th edition DWing option.

If a player gets a second weapon (priced 3 - 10gp) and faces an opponent with a shield (priced 5)

The +1 to hit roll would directly balance to the 6+ armour save.

The only problem is the lack of link to the WFB.

#2: Armour increases DIRECTLY to Shield.

This I believe is a simple answer as a shield with +2 armour (+1 from ranged, +2 in HtH) Would make it statistically on par with a 2nd attack. I know a lot of people would feel that the +2 is too much, but I ask you to go and sit (for countless hours) and do the math.

Once you realise how incredible the advantage is for ANY number of additional attacks. (It is ludicrous) you will realise that the moment a henchmen/Hero comes along with 3 attacks against a unit with armour, the armour becomes close to worthless.

Not even including Strength, this would at least marginally solve the issue.

--- Statistical Rant ---

if you need a 4,5 and 6 to hit.

You then make a fraction of what a MISS would be. (aka, 3/6)

then you take the amount of attack dice you have, and you make that the power to which you apply the fraction.

so 1 attack dice = 3/6^1 which is 3/6 to MISS - So a hit is 50%
... 2 attack dice = 3/6^2 which is 9/36 to MISS - So a hit is 75% (of which 50% is to hit once, 25% to hit twice)
... 3 attack dice = 3/6^3 which is 27/216 to MISS - So a hit is 87.5% (of which, I don't even want to go into detail)

Think about it!

If armor were worth having to begin with, I'd be fine with adding +1 to shield, converting DW to +1 to hit, and be done with it. Just remember that your percentages are a little simplified, as DW adding +1 hit to all attacks would be significantly better for high Attack profile models than low ones. DW adding +1 WS would be less often that impactive, but would improve shield over DW. This method also still leaves 2h weapons out, since armor itself is not improved.

Even so, the AS needs help even against single-hit models, due to Strength's armor-piercing ability. Would it be better then to change tactics and remove/reduce Strength's armor-pierceing ability by 1, as has been suggested? Maybe this should go to:

S1-4: -0 AS
S5-6: -1 AS
S7-8: -2 AS

That would also possibly have an effect of making 2h weapons more attractive, as armor might show up more often, and there'd be a reason to have a few S4 heavy hitters with 2h weapons to nullify the Light Armor+Shield enemies. wait - 15gc on practically every experienced model can still nullify 25gc? Not enough still. Allowing the Serious Injuries save on armor should completely take care of the cost difference.

Honestely, I can go with either solution:
1. Restrict DW to certain models; restrict unskiled DW to a minimal effectiveness, bump up armor to increase both its effectiveness and attractiveness.
2. Severely restrict the armor-piercing of Strength; convert DW to a simple +1; bump up at shield to +1, give armor the Serious Injuries save.

We've seen several solutions on this thread, from all angles, many workable, a few not.

However, people seem to have very strong opinions about what not to give up: Strength's armor-piercing (it's a core WHFB mechanic) and DW giving additional attacks (it's a core WHFB mechanic), or restricting Henchmen from DW (it's a core WHFB occurence). Should we instead give up Strength advances? After all, that's just a core Mordheim mechanic (rather than WHFB).

To me, the least impactive to core WHFB (and still honoring core Mordheim) is giving up DW with Henchmen. We gotta give up something, or give into DW being the norm in Mordheim. What are you willing to give up - or least live with?

Should we poll this?

i meant just like the skill that enables you to wield any weapon. to have a skill that would enable the hero (who cannot have armor) to take armor. and this would fall under the strength skill list. (just a suggestion)

Well, we do have Warrior Wizard for the wizards - of course, wizards can wear armor anyway (they just can't cast spells while doing so). All heroes can get armor in the Trading phase, unless their model abilities specifically prohibit it (such as Ghouls). I can't see allowing Ghouls armor, even via a skill.

TheFool wrote:

The +1 to hit roll would directly balance to the 6+ armour save.

This is false. The +1 AS from shield can be negated (st, special rules (axes)) or even directly bypassed (crits), the +1 to hit can not. In this instance, a second weapon is always equal to or better than a shield. Therefore, you always take a second weapon. Therefore, this is not a solution.

Nastyogre wrote:

ts06122 wrote:

To fix the game you must: make dual-wield bonus statistically equal to single hand weapon and shield bonus.

I can't say this is really the case. By forcing statistical equivalence we remove any reason to DW. WHy bother? Its merely just a modeling decision then.

This is completely ignorant. If there is a statistical advantage to one equipment choice, there is no reason to choose any other. When they are equivalent, you are free to choose what you think will best suit your playing style and it will be your choices in the field that determine the real worth of the equipment. In some cases, like double-handed weapons, it is hard to directly compare statistics, but with a second hand weapon vs a shield, the choices are directly comparable and quite unequal as it is. Most suggestions here weaken a second weapon, but the choice is still obviously better than a shield. Therefore, nothing changes and the extra time and rules are a waste.

wyldhunt wrote:

Well, we do have Warrior Wizard for the wizards - of course, wizards can wear armor anyway (they just can't cast spells while doing so). All heroes can get armor in the Trading phase, unless their model abilities specifically prohibit it (such as Ghouls). I can't see allowing Ghouls armor, even via a skill.

true ; it was just a wild shot


i agree we have to drop something.

could someone make a summary of what we have made pour 'm into a few options. then we can make a poll as you suggest and then test 'm in that order and post the results?

To help create an answer (or at least have a more concise way of dealing with this issue)

Go to: http://the-dancing-bandit.com/ and read the main page.

Nice! Now at least we can begin to see where some sympathies lie, popularity-wise. Hopefully we can get enough people to vote to get a decent result.

Hmm, when attempt to View Results, I get no response - I do see there's an "Error on page" in my status bar on the poll's page.

The more I think about it, no additional attacks, but allowing re-rolls makes considerable sense. It would work akin to Twin-linked in 40k, which is not broken by any means.

Alright, once again, I'm throwing away my earlier suggestions and biases, and going back to square one, re-analyzing this, and seeing where it leads (btw, this is the way I work at finding solutions, because good results are founded on good research, and when research changes, often results change too). So here we go:




I think we all have a pretty good understanding that DW isn't broken as-is in other GW systems. Why is that?




I pulled out my ancient WHFB books (vintage '92) to see. Here is what I found:

- DW was allowed +1 attack

- To hit charts are exactly the same as Mordheim

- AS is the same for shields/armor

- Newer WHFB does give a +1 to Armor Save (AS) in HtH for weapon/shield combo, which is missing from Mordheim

- At least my ancient WHFB book does not have Critical Wounds – this is a core mechanic deviation in Mordheim

- Shield has the same cost as Short Bow

- Light Armor has the same cost as Bow

- Heavy Armor has the same cost as Long Bow

- There is no way to "purchase" or earn a Strength increase for models (maybe there is for a few specific ones, but I did not find any in the Empire Armies book I also perused)




So, we have four core mechanic/fluff deviations in Mordheim from WHFB:

- Body armor cost twice as much

- Almost all models can get at least one Strength increase

- Critical Wounds

- No +1AS from weapon+shield




What are the effects of these changes from core WHFB?

- A shield becomes fairly worthless, as the Strength increase cancels its usefulness

- Armor becomes unused, as its cost has been increased and its effectiveness reduced

- Double-weapon use falls because while there is still high Toughness to deal with, there is no armor

- The extra, now empty, hand is just itching to do something, so it grabs another weapon and goes to DW




Why do we have these core mechanic/fluff deviations in Mordheim?

- Body armor cost: here's a quote from the Editor in TC22: “And as we've mentioned before, not all of the points/cost allocations are always fair and balanced and for a reason – to reflect the relative rarity of such items. Armour is very expensive, far more so than weapons and other equipment, and this should be reflected in its cost – not many mercenaries can afford to get the best armour and most have to make do with just a simple helmet and shield if they are lucky.”

- Strength increase: Mordheim has campaign rules added, and as we expect from such, a way to earn experience and improve models.

- Critical Wounds: I can discern no game balance reason for this, though it may be due to seeing increased Wounds due to experience.




So where does this leave us with Mordheim? It leaves us in a different balance state than WHFB, where DW becomes the norm, because other effective options for off-hand use have been nerfed.




So what do we do about it? Either we accept that core rules changes produce a core feel difference – that of DW weapons being king, or we find a way to re-balance DW with armor and 2h weapon usage. I greatly prefer the latter.




One thing to remember, and yes, I feel I must make this point as strongly as I can, to help others understand: CORE WHFB RULES HAVE ALREADY BEEN CHANGED FOR MORDHEIM. That is the reason I don't mind changing a few others to restore a weapons/armor usage imbalance between what we see in WHFB and Mordheim. I'd much rather change rules and have the weapons mix be restored.




Now the question is: which other core Mordheim/WHFB rules should be changed to restore the weapons/armor mix balance? This should be as few as possible, and as simply as possible, to get the job done.




The parameters are:

- Keep as close to existing Mordheim rules as possible; just after that, keep as close to core WHFB rules as possible.

- From a TC editor we likely have this: armor should remain expensive and rare. Alright, that means that double-handed weapons will also likely be so.

- Further from this TC editor we have: “The other idea would be to find a way of improving armour without upsetting game balance – but that is another story!” Let's explore that story. There are two ways we can improve armor without reducing its cost:

1. Improve its AS

2. Nerf Strength's armor-piercing effects.




There are two immediate items we can do:




1. Remove Critical Wounds. Unfortunately, we cannot do this easily and simply. There are skills, abilities, and weapon effects which depend upon Critical Wounds. Let's leave Critical Wounds in, since removing it directly messes with other Mordheim rules.




2. Include the updated core WHFB rule that weapon+shield grants a +1 AS HtH. Easy? Yes. Simple? Yes. Let's do it. This also grants a benefit of offsetting the high Strength armor-piercing (AP) effect available to all henchmen and most heroes (due to racial maximums). Is that enough? Well, with a shield, we now have a basis to buy armor again, as we've offset the Strength AP bonus available to all but a few heroes. However, Armor is still expensive, and a 6+ AS (shield vs an incoming S4 HtH attack), by itself, is not enough to counteract the 1/3 increased chance to hit by DW (which remains even if DW is only used as a re-roll of a missed attack).




However, armor's effectiveness at this level still lags the same effectiveness in WHFB, since there is a Strength increase still available to Mordheim models which isn't to WHFB models. Let's look at nerfing Strength's AP then. If we do so, will that remove the reason to have Strength advances? No. Since armor isn't used now, the increased AP from increased Strength is currently wasted. Increased Strength also gives an increased chance to Wound, which is its real value anyway. Should we remove the Strength AP completely? I think not, since it is a core GW mechanic – we just need to re-balance it for Mordheim. Then how much to nerf Strength's AP? Since most models can only ever get a +1 Strength, bringing the AP down by 1 should suffice: S1-4: no effect to AS; S5: -1AS; S6: -2AS; and so on.




Is this enough? Armor will still be rare, due to expense, but that's a design decision by GW. Let's review whether it'll be enough to at least restore armor to rare use (rather than no use), and at least have some weapon+shield users.




Starting henchmen:

DW: cost 3 (mace + free dagger). 75% to hit even-WS opponent (25% chance for 2 hits)

Weapon+Shield: cost 5 (free dagger + shield) 50% to hit even-WS opponent; 33% chance to stop up to S4 Wound (except certain Crits), effective up to S5)

- That increased chance to stop S4/S5 wounds is a benefit! Is it worth 2gc more than DW? It does give a greater defensive bonus (+33%) to most hits now than DW gives for offense (+25%)...

- For 3gc more, both models can avoid the dagger's +1 to enemy's AS; the DW model has the greater benefit without spending this extra 3gc, since his mace attack doesn't suffer the dagger penalty.




Hero with money to burn (test whether armor's cost is worth anything now):

DW: 2 swords, cost 20. 75% to hit even-WS opponent (25% chance for 2 hits)

Weapon+Shield+Armor: sword+shield+light armor (avoiding the movement penalty): cost 35. 50% chance to hit even-WS opponent; 50% chance to stop up to S4 Wound (except certain Crits); still effective up to S6.

-A 50% defensive bonus is definitely worth more than a 25% offensive bonus, but is it worth 15gc more? Probably not.




It still looks like we need to reduce DW some – in both cases above, DW's cost-to-benefit still outweighs shield/armor. Should we then reduce the models that can use it (changing core rules and arbitrary) or reduce DW's effectiveness (changing core rules and possibly being more complex)? Can we change a core rule without being more complex and without being arbitrary? Let's try this: an off-hand weapon allows a re-roll of a single missed attack, at -1 to hit. That's almost as much as we can nerf DW's effectiveness while still allowing it at all. Is that so complex a rule? I don't think so. Edge cases analysis:




1. What about paired weapons? Included – simple, and brings them closer in line with parries from multiple sources.

2. What about Skills and Special Rules which give an off-hand attack (like Tail-fighting and Mutations)? Not included – these are special ways to increase attacks available only to select models, and so should remain their own special extra attacks.




Redo of examples and statistics from this DW nerf:




Starting henchmen:

DW: cost 3 (mace + free dagger). 67% to hit even-WS opponent (no chance for 2 hits)

Weapon+Shield: cost 5 (free dagger + shield) 50% to hit even-WS opponent; 33% chance to stop up to S4 Wound (except certain Crits), effective up to S5)

- That increased chance to stop S4/S5 wounds is a benefit! Is it worth 2gc more than DW? Definitely! It does give a much greater defensive bonus (+33%) to most hits now than DW gives for offense (+17%).

- For 3gc more, both models can avoid the dagger's +1 to enemy's AS; the DW model has the greater benefit without spending this extra 3gc, since his mace attack doesn't suffer the dagger penalty.




Hero with money to burn (test whether armor's cost is worth anything now):

DW: 2 swords, cost 20. 67% to hit even-WS opponent (no chance for 2 hits)

Weapon+Shield+Armor: sword+shield+light armor (avoiding the movement penalty): cost 35. 50% chance to hit even-WS opponent; 50% chance to stop up to S4 Wound (except certain Crits); still effective up to S6.

-A 50% defensive bonus is definitely worth more than a 17% offensive bonus, but is it worth 15gc more? A good question, and one that will probably lead to more variety on the field.



Conclusion:

There are three rules which can be changed in Mordheim to bring the desired result in line with the parameters specified:

1. Weapon+shield grants +1 AS in HtH (bringing the current WHFB rule into Mordheim)

2. Reduce high Strength's armor-piercing by 1 at all levels (S1-4, no AS change; S5: -1AS; S6 -2AS; etc.) This restores the balance of Strength AP versus armor to a level seen in WHFB without further changes to Mordheim rules.

3. Change the DW rule to: “an off-hand weapon allows a re-roll of a single missed attack, at -1 to hit.” This effects all weapons, including pairs, but does not change additional attacks allowed by Skills and Special Rules, like Tail-Fighting and Mutations. While this is a rules change not reflected in core WHFB, it offsets the increased armor cost in Mordheim without affecting the cost of the armor itself.




So what should we see from this conclusion?

1. Armor will still be rare, due to expense, and likely only used on heroes. Light armor + shield still costs as much as a regular henchman.

2. DW will be a choice rather than requirement, even for henchmen. It still provides a value, but so does a shield now.

3. The increase of armor's defensiveness will possibly increase double-handed weapon use. However, with Critical Wounds still in place, and 1/2 of armor's increase effectiveness tied up in shields, double-handed weapons will still be pretty rare.

4. We will not see models using only a single 1h weapon (unless it's the free dagger). If, due to expense, they can only afford a single 3gc weapon, they'll still use that free dagger with DW.

I love how much effort and reasoning you have! It's true dedication! (Compared to my half rants and ravings)

I love EVERYTHING you said, however I have one tiny question.


Duel Wielding - How do you chose an effect?

Aka, if a model has a sword and axe, do you nominate the primary attack (and thus the effect) before you roll (and therefore I would presume if the first attack fails, the 2nd attack at -1 will be done by the secondary weapon?)

wyldhunt wrote:

I'm throwing away my earlier suggestions and biases...

Conclusion:

There are three rules which can be changed in Mordheim to bring the desired result in line with the parameters specified:

1. Weapon+shield grants +1 AS in HtH (bringing the current WHFB rule into Mordheim)

2. Reduce high Strength's armor-piercing by 1 at all levels (S1-4, no AS change; S5: -1AS; S6 -2AS; etc.) This restores the balance of Strength AP versus armor to a level seen in WHFB without further changes to Mordheim rules.

3. Change the DW rule to: “an off-hand weapon allows a re-roll of a single missed attack, at -1 to hit.” This effects all weapons, including pairs, but does not change additional attacks allowed by Skills and Special Rules, like Tail-Fighting and Mutations. While this is a rules change not reflected in core WHFB, it offsets the increased armor cost in Mordheim without affecting the cost of the armor itself.




So what should we see from this conclusion?

1. Armor will still be rare, due to expense, and likely only used on heroes. Light armor + shield still costs as much as a regular henchman.

2. DW will be a choice rather than requirement, even for henchmen. It still provides a value, but so does a shield now.

3. The increase of armor's defensiveness will possibly increase double-handed weapon use. However, with Critical Wounds still in place, and 1/2 of armor's increase effectiveness tied up in shields, double-handed weapons will still be pretty rare.

4. We will not see models using only a single 1h weapon (unless it's the free dagger). If, due to expense, they can only afford a single 3gc weapon, they'll still use that free dagger with DW.

Well done wyldhunt!

I must disagree with your conclusion however. These rules leave DW with a small statistical advantage over shield, mainly due to crits, but also due to the (even reduced) st negation. I would really prefer shields to actually be statistically better than DW at first glance, if we could get them to 4+ somehow, that would be ideal, or peg the re-roll/second attack at 6+ to hit.

What if we remove free daggers from the game and instead give free shields ("scrap shield")? Then we add a "combat shield" that gives +5 AS/+4 AS in combat @ 15-25 gc? FYI the rules for fists are: St as user -1, +1 enemy AS.

Shields with +2 AR.

It's a big jump and slightly out of the norm, but it garantee's that shields won't be a marginal advantage.

Quote :

Further from this TC editor we have: “The other idea would be to find a way of improving armour without upsetting game balance – but that is another story!” Let's explore that story. There are two ways we can improve armor without reducing its cost:

1. Improve its AS

2. Nerf Strength's armor-piercing effects.

What about a third : A skill that increases armor AS. It keeps armor prices the same but can increase its affectiveness. Call it "Master Armorer" Grants an additional x value to a warriors armor save, because he knows the finite strengths of the armor he wears.

just a thought from a newb

wow superb guys!!! we're really getting somewhere!

I'll do some research once i have my holiday (just 2 more days!!!)

keep it up

TheFool wrote:

Shields with +2 AR.

It's a big jump and slightly out of the norm, but it garantee's that shields won't be a marginal advantage.

Perhaps all shields +1 AS against shooting, "scrap shield" +1 additional AS in HtH (to 5+), "combat shield" +2 additional AS in HtH (to 4+)? This makes spears and morning stars (more) viable as well.

My current thinking:
I like off-hand bonus going to a re-roll at -1 to hit, feels believable and still quite attractive as equipment choice. I like HtH bonus for shields per current WFB rules precedent, it's a step in the right direction. I like shifting armor negation to starting at 5+, too many models start at St 4 and this severely weakens armor (i.e. shields). I like replacing a free dagger with a free shield, this would discourage dw with dagger and make shields a common occurance, guaranteed. The rule book says daggers and knives are common, but is it believable that these are all sharp and battle worthy? Isn't it more believable that any odd piece of wooden debris could be used as a shield for free? Maybe more stratification is necessary, maybe free shields break on a save each battle (replaced, free, next battle), a standard shield doesn't break (can save more than once a battle), while a "combat shield" is expensive and so is reserved for later in a warband's development.

Some cool ideas!

Off-the-cuff reactions:

Dual Wielding - How do you chose an effect? The off-hand weapon should be chosen at the start of the battle and not changed during the scenario. This was an assumption of mine, so it's better to state it.

A skill that increases armor AS. Sounds great! However, doing so restricts who gets the bonus (just heroes), so it would be a lesser option for "basic balancing." Yet, I'd still love to add this to the Strength skill list! Hmm - could conflict too much with Resilient, but Resilient is just HtH (regardless of armor), where this skill would be both missile and HtH (but just armor). I'd still take Dodge, Resilient, and Step Aside before this skill.

Shield 5+ AS. I still can't open up my head enough to accept a shield AS greater than Light Armor's AS.

Crits nerfing armor. That could well be so, especially with the basic (rather than optional) crit charts. 4/6 of 1/6 of every hit (when Strengh is high comared to Toughness that crits are possible) negate armor, that is, 11% of crit-possible hits completely bypass AS.

The next harder nerfs to DW would be to peg the offhand attack at 6+ and/or make the offhand attack not able to provide crits. The latter should take care of the crit issue, and preserve some semblance of WS making a difference in DW, so that's my first preference.

The free dagger is a pretty well-ingrained GW fluff item. It's the eating dagger, of course, and the small hidden back-up weapon. A lot of actual warriors carried shields to use as protection as well as eating (and gaming!)tables, but it doesn't seem that GW fluff has kept this idea. I got a feeling that WHFB people would find a free shield jarring.

So, right now, I'm leaning towards just removing crit possibilities from off-hand attacks. Will have to run some numbers at some point.

wyldhunt wrote:

the eating dagger

How bout it can't be DW'd or crit.