The Big Boring Dual Wield Thread

Hello,

i. Page 35, "Fighting with two weapons". Add the line "Due to the difficulty in fighting with more than one weapon, any warrior attempting to do so suffers a -1 penalty to hit with both weapons. A warrior using a pistol in hand-to-hand combat is exempt from this penalty.

should this rule apply to skaven Fighting claws as well?

Love the conversation in this thread.

This may start an argument haha (I hope not) but are there links for a compilation of the most up to date or most balanced rules?

GW has on their website the updated Mordheim rulebook complete with errata already built in. There are other websites devoted to this as well: Coreheim comes to mind, though they have tweaked the combat rules some, as well as given their models vastly boosted stats. There are a few others as well, but as far as a comprehensive set of links? I'm not sure about that, but others likely know more than !

I think he means just with Dual Wielding.
And no sorry there is not as there are a lot of schools of thought on how to handle this (as you can tell) and no one can agree on how best to handle it.
My advice is you find what looks to be the best (and I sugest simplest to remember and apply) and go with it.
The -1 to hit on both hands does not alone fix this IMHO... but thats why my group also boost armour (extra armour save and less crit negating) seams to work but it's up to you and your group.

Ok thanks So generally speaking most people use the traditional Mordheim rules as printed by GW still? But may have house rules about things like DW, Armour Save, and the like?

AusGamer wrote:

Ok thanks So generally speaking most people use the traditional Mordheim rules as printed by GW still? But may have house rules about things like DW, Armour Save, and the like?

Yes on both counts. My group usually plays with Light and Heavy armor at half cost, and the old 5th-7th edition Hand Weapon + Shield giving and extra +1 Armor save. We also give a -1 to Hit for the off-hand weapons for DW, though most groups just give a -1 to hit for both weapons when dual wielding. It seems to be pretty decent either way.

AusGamer wrote:

Ok thanks So generally speaking most people use the traditional Mordheim rules as printed by GW still? But may have house rules about things like DW, Armour Save, and the like?

Yep that's about how most of us see it.

Its been a long time since someone posted here .. so I do...

After many tries and failure, we finally end up with this.

-1 to hit when you fight with 2 weapons

Ambidexterity combat skill that negate the -1

Shields give 5+ AS
Bucklers give 6+ and parry

Adding the lightweight attributes to Daggers, Weeping blades, Fighting claws, Rapiers, brass knucle and all Paired weapons you come along.

Lightweight : Ignore the -1 penalty when you fight with two weapons with the lightweight weapons AND add +1 attack with the weakest weapon if you also have ambidexterity and fight with two lightweight weapons.




The effect in our game was really efficient. (pros)

1 - We saw more shields and more armors because adding them together gives a good save.
2- Ambidexterity is a skill of choice for many warrior and it doesn't gives a soooo good advantage.
3 - As armors are more popular, 2H weapons too in order to break through them.
4 - Weapon expert is now a popular choice in order to get brass knuckles or rapiers.
5 - Some fighters use their daggers as a second weapons instead of the classic Mace.

But, (cons)

1 - It gives skaven a little edge (weeping blades, claws).



PS : We also added a new shield available to all warriors with the shield option :

Large shield 10 gold : 5+ As (4+VS range weapon as long as you are not KD or stunned).





Is this perfect : NO.

But it is really working on balancing 2 weapon fighters vs shield bearer and Two-handers.

maybe it would be worth testing out giving a few Skaven heroes a small price hike and give them the "Ambidexterity" skill to start. Then take Lightweight off of fighting claws and weaping blades.
Thus it would take that slight edge away from Skaven as only a few heroes would be able to take advantage of this from the start and they have to pay a little extra for it.

just asking:
Is your -1 to hit for both weapons or just the off hand?

Is the Lightweight rule in effect if both weapons have the rule and not just one (IE mace and dagger don't get the rule effect)?

1 : -1 for both weapons.

2: You must have 1 lightweight wepon to have the -1 negated.

I know I'm coming into this way late... but I've always been in the camp that I dislike seeing too many dual-wielding nutters running around all common-like. I think I've settled with making the off-hand attack at -1 to hit. Seems to be the most simple and easiest for newer people to put a connection to the real world. Dagger and other special cases are exempt from this rule (as others have already pointed out).

I also like the idea of improving armor. So far, I like the idea of applying the Warhammer saves to Mordheim. Essentially +1 save and +2 save in close combat for shields (doesn't count in the back - gives an added bonus for striking someone's back). As far as actual armor.. I don't want to mess with prices too much because I do like that they are rarer, but definitely want to make them more effective. As others have already mentioned, I like making it so there are no movement penalties until you go with heavy armor with shield. I also like the rules of adding some protection from serious injuries post battle.

Now this is where I kind of have an issue. One of my main opponents is Lizardmen. We already know their crazy scaly skin save. Essentially this means Saurus with shield and hand weapon in close combat becomes 3+ save. Seems a bit extreme. What do you guys think? The balancing factor only comes in once I start buying armor since my armor will give me post-battle injury reduction (with the house rules) and scaly save doesn't since its built-in. Logically it makes sense too since armor isn't directly a part of the body.. so there is the off chance that a lot of the damage can be negated on the way in.. whereas the scaly skin is directly a part of the body and once its penetrated.. there aren't things like clothes, leather, studding, etc under it possibly hindering the extent of the damage. Essentially Lizardmen with their natural save become more durable during battle, but other races with armor makes them more survivable post battle. Do you guys think this balances out?

I always thought that using armour as your post battle serious injury save as a bad idea.
why?
well as you say above the Lizardmen get some built in armour but can't us it in the post game... but not all there heroes can get armour (but some can). But even if you think this balances out not all warbands have the same accsess to the same armour. Dwarves who are already the hardest to kill (and already one of the strongest warbands) have a huge advantage over say Skaven who only get Light Armour.
Now if you give all armour the same post game bonus then light armour is just as valid as heavy armour in the post game.
Also not all warriors can use armour (Wizards) making them weaker in effect.

I think the best way to get a post game bonus for the serious injury roll is have an expencive item that all warbands can buy and carry on a warrior like healing herbs but is one use.

Armour needs help but this is the wrong way to fix it I think.

^ True.. so maybe it'd be better to just half the cost of armor and leave em without movement penalty until they reach to heavy armor + shield status.

Also, has anyone tried the comparison between giving shields a 6+ ward save like 8th edition vs giving +2 save in CC? Or possibly conferring both bonuses with shield(though this sounds too powerful).

I think 6 save roll is better than +1 armour save .. Is word light for starter warbands but becco e better after, when the strenght goes up.

garathiel wrote:

I think 6 save roll is better than +1 armour save .. Is word light for starter warbands but becco e better after, when the strenght goes up.

Yea.. I might give 6+ "ward" save a try rather than giving it +2 in CC when wielding a HW+Shield. This keeps things in check in terms of making sure anyone who uses a shield gets a decent enough benefit, but doesn't let things get out of hand such as Lizardmen Saurus all of a sudden getting 3+ save in close combat.

The one issue that might happen with this is that it might make some ward saves too powerful. I'm not familiar with all the ward saves out there in Mordheim.. but I'm sure there might be some combo that makes it too powerful. Remember.. this is if we directly adapt 8th ed HW+SHIELD rules in that it gives essentially a 6+/+1 to your ward saves.

Step Aside skill came to mind.. but the description reads that it cannot be modified.. so I'll take it as such in that it can't be modified for worse or better.

I suppose an easy solution is to just make that 6+ shield save independent of it self so it'll never class with any other saves. I guess problem with this is that it'd mean more dice rolling, but I'm never shy from that anyways. Plus the vast majority of models that will have shields won't have additional ward saves anyways.

Actually... I should probably create a new thread about this.. since this is already getting away from dual wielding itself

This thread is very big and boring! *yawns*

For those who can't agree, agree to disagree or can't agree to disagree... or just prefer to follow the advice laid out in the Mordheim bible by Tuomas P, then I offer the following solutions:

1. If you don't want an enemy warrior to wield two hand weapons then chop off his arm! Pretty simple really. Take the model out of action. This can be done most easily in close combat. Alternatively use a missile weapon or spell or cause the player to move his model into a place where it takes a fall and injures itself. Encourage the player to roll 'Arm Wound' in the post-battle sequence. And there you go. No more secondary hand weapon in combat.

2. In the Border Town Burning supplement, Cianty promoted a house rule for allowing any warriors to be armed with a hand weapon and shield to allow an extra +1 modifier to saving throws. This seems like a useful temporary solution. All trained soldiers and veterans of Warhammer battlefields learn how to do this if they are shield bearers.

3. If any of your players aren't interested in house ruling that their enemies can get +2 saving bonus for a shield for free then there is another solution. Any Hero who can use a shield can learn the 'Bulwark' fighting style (see Warhammer RPG 3rd Edition) to benefit from the enhanced save modifier. Bulwark is a combat skill. Whenever a warrior learns a new combat skill they may choose Bulwark. I like this solution because the player has earned the right to do this by using an advance.

Bulwark: A defensive style requiring a shield in one hand and a hand weapon such as a sword in the other. A warrior armed with a single-handed weapon (sword, spear, hammer, etc.) and a shield gets an additional +1 bonus on his armour saving roll in close combat.

Regards,

Werekin

What do you guys think of this for strictly dual-wielding without having to add any additional skills?

• WS 3 and less: -1 to hit with both weapons
• WS 4: -1 to hit with off hand weapon
• WS 5 and up: no penalty

Just using the logic that most WS seems to revolve around 4 being the official number of someone that is above being "professionally trained" or "basic warrior" and 5 being the true mark of someone who is excellent in close combat.

I don't like that idea because it makes the advancment of WS much more valuable then it already is.
Going from WS 3 to 4 would in effect be a +2 WS for the primary hand well the jump to WS5 would be a +2WS for your off hand.
I get where your going here but I think for game balance it doesn't work.

Pervavita wrote:

I don't like that idea because it makes the advancment of WS much more valuable then it already is.
Going from WS 3 to 4 would in effect be a +2 WS for the primary hand well the jump to WS5 would be a +2WS for your off hand.
I get where your going here but I think for game balance it doesn't work.

Totally true.. but I thought thats potentially one of the better effects of it. I always thought a lot of WS seems negligible at WS 3-5 and not really showcasing how much superior WS 5 is to 3. Its only when you get to half WS that you really start noticing a difference. This is what I got from playing years of FB and 40k.

How about -2 on off-hands?

I was reading through this thread and surprised this suggestion was not there - hence why I am making this post. Credits for inspiring me to use this -2 modifier on the off-hand goes to TrueLancer.

I've made a calculation showing what this means for the average henchman.

All calculations are made using the following formula:
((Chance of succesful Hit * Chance of succesful Wound * Chance of opponent failing AS) / 216) * Attacks
Credits goes to: http://mathhammer.blogspot.dk/2009/01/super-simple-method-216.html

Henchman with 1 attack:

WS3, S3 vs. WS3, T3, 5+ AS
Halberd: 28%
Axe/Axe: 28%
Axe/Mace or Axe/Sword: 27%

WS4, S4 vs. WS3, T3, 5+ AS
Halberd: 56%
Axe/Axe: 66%
Axe/Mace or Axe/Sword: 63%

WS4, S3 vs. WS4, T4, 5+ AS
Halberd: 21%
Axe/Axe: 19%
Axe/Mace or Axe/Sword: 18%

WS4, S4 vs. WS3, T4, 5+ AS
Halberd: 44%
Axe/Axe: 50%
Axe/Mace or Axe/Sword: 47%

WS4, S4 vs. WS4, T4, 5+ AS
Halberd: 33%
Axe/Axe: 33%
Axe/Mace or Axe/Sword: 32%

Henchman with 2 attacks:

WS3, S4 vs. WS3, T3, 5+ AS
Halberd: 83%
Axe/Axe: 78%
Axe/Mace or Axe/Sword: 76%

WS4, S4 vs. WS3, T3, 5+ AS
Halberd: 111%
Axe/Axe: 111%
Axe/Mace or Axe/Sword: 107%

WS4, S4 vs. WS3, T4, 5+ AS
Halberd: 88%
Axe/Axe: 83%
Axe/Mace or Axe/Sword: 81%

WS4, S4 vs. WS4, T4, 5+ AS
Halberd: 66%
Axe/Axe: 58%
Axe/Mace or Axe/Sword: 57%

As we can see, a lot of the time the Halberd is on par with the Axe/Axe combo. With 2 attacks, a Halberd is usually better, but with 1, you might serve better with two weapons. Even though this is overall true, the main point is, that they're close to equal a lot of the time - atleast closer than -1 to hit, and a lot closer than no modifiers. I've made a lot of other calculations with other stats as well, but they all show the same thing - this is fairly balanced.

Hope this inspires people to try it out, we use it in our house rules, and it seems to work wonders. It also brings extra joy, to roll a six, when it's all you can hit with - and it actually happens quite a lot ^_^

The percentage is of course the chance of wounding the opponent - you could also increase the calculation with KD/stun/OOA if you want!

Interesting would be the inclusion of fear - which is able to prevent all offhand attacks.

In our gaming group we decided to take both ways, a -1 penalty to hit with the offhand and a +1 AS bonus for shields in close combat, which proved as balanced (only regarding practical tests, not statistics).

Would fear do that? Or just hit on 6s, as I think the rule says :-P
Also the off-hand offers an additional benefit - when enemies are KO'ed, you don't need to hit with your lousy off-hand, you just need to wound. In our campaign, you use an attack to take a stunned opponent OOA as well, which gives off-hands another bonus.

I took your suggestion and made some calculations, using the same stats as before. The opponent still has Light Armour / Shield and we're operating with a henchman with either Halberd or Axe/Axe:

Henchman with 1 attack and Halberd or Axe/Axe

WS3, S3 vs. WS3, T3, 4+ AS
Halberd: 22%
Axe/Axe: 28%

WS4, S4 vs. WS3, T3, 4+ AS
Halberd: 46%
Axe/Axe: 55%

WS4, S3 vs. WS4, T4, 4+ AS
Halberd: 17%
Axe/Axe: 15%

WS4, S4 vs. WS3, T4, 4+ AS
Halberd: 37%
Axe/Axe: 42%

WS4, S4 vs. WS4, T4, 4+ AS
Halberd: 27%
Axe/Axe: 28%

Henchman with 2 attacks and Halberd or Axe/Axe

WS3, S4 vs. WS3, T3, 4+ AS
Halberd: 70%
Axe/Axe: 74%

WS4, S4 vs. WS3, T3, 4+ AS
Halberd: 93%
Axe/Axe: 102%

WS4, S4 vs. WS3, T4, 4+ AS
Halberd: 74%
Axe/Axe: 76%

WS4, S4 vs. WS4, T4, 4+ AS
Halberd: 56%
Axe/Axe: 56%

Thing is, that we want two different things. You want HW/Shield to be a better option, I want other weapons to be better options. With the -1 to hit and 4+ with Light Armour / Shield (2+ with Gromril), you get harder to kill, no doubt, but you'll still only face dual-wielding henchmen, which I find unsatisfying in a game, where all weapon combinations should be viable options. Problem with the latter solution is, that if you don't fight with HW/Shield, you're still vulnerable to dual-wielders, making those two the only real options.

Reducing the chance to hit on the off-hand with 2 takes dual-wielding down on par with the rest of the weapondry, making everything viable.

Fear says you need a 6 to hit, if you compare WS, the chart says you need a 3-5+ to hit. Any to hit modifiers are applied to the rolled dice. The rule doesn't say natural 6s will hit.

So, with -1 to hit for example WS3 vs. WS3 needs normally a 4+, but if you roll a natural 4, it's just a 3 with the modifier. Similiar with fear - you need a 6, roll a 6 and the modifier says: nope, that's just a 5, you miss.

At least that's how I read the rules.^^


You're right with suggesting, we want better armour or hw/shild-combination. But if there is more Armour, you are going to need also more 2-handed Weapons with +2 strength in my opinion. At some point the -1 save modifier of axes just isn't enough anymore.

Additionally you may reach S6 with Flails etc., which often prevents possible parries.
I have to admit that this doesn't help halberds at all.^^°

Finally there are many different approaches, which all work fine in most cases. Like applying a -1 modifier to ALL attacks while dual-wielding. All of them still have some drawbacks.

-2 to offhand makes 2-handed weapons more viable, but doesn't help the shield problem
-1 to offhand and better shields doesn't help halberds
-1 to all attacks is for A1-henchmen same as with a -2 offhand, for more Attacks you need to create a new skill for dual-wielding, otherwise it hurts heroes too much
-2 to offhand & shield buff would make dual-wielding too bad

I think you just have to point out, what suits your gaming group best or what you see as the worst problem and buff/nerf accordingly.