Help with Paired Weapons

[XarXar]

We are playing second edition and we attempt to use RUE for rules clarification.

However I am really confused about Paired Weapons and could use some additional guidance my feeble brain just has not figured it out.

So any character trained with a hand to hand combat skill can parry 3 opponents in a round (one attack sequence). This is stated in RUE p 346 multiple attack rule with the stipulation that they are in line of sight.

Now Paired weapons has 4 abilities:
1. Strike and Parry
2. Twin, simultaneous strikes
3. Strike two different targets (or strike one and parry another incoming attack)
4. Parry two different attackers, one with each hand.

Questions:
Ability (1)
1. Does Counter attacking use a combat turn if the parry is triggered by Automatic Parry?
2. If Counter attacking consume a melee action is that the next action or just one from the melee round (15 seconds)?
Ability (2)
1. It is said that when you use Twin, simultaneous strikes you lose automatic parry and leave yourself open to the NEXT attack. Does that mean the next immediate attack or all incoming attacks until your next turn?
Ability (3)
1. Can you target a single opponent with both attacks?
2. If you are using the optional hit location rule could you target different locations on a single opponent in fact having different targets?
3. How is Ability 3 different from Ability 1 in the fact that both can be used to parry an attack and attack something else?
4. Does this ability consume a melee action if you are triggering it from a parry? Disarm and Entangle both have verbiage when used defensively that they consume a melee action. however similar text is missing from Paired Weapons.
Ability (4)
1. Was this an over sight that a specially skilled fighter with two weapons can only parry 2 attacks while a more commonly trained fighter can parry 3?
2. If a person with a single weapon can skillful parry 3 opponents how is it a person skilled with paired weapons forget how to do this and can only parry 2 (1 per weapon)?


Simultaneous Attack page 347 RUE does not state that is takes a melee action to perform unlike the text in disarm and entangle. Why would the simultaneous attacks provided by paired weapons consume an melee attack? The ability to defend in addition to the attack is granted by the requirement of the skill and appears to be balanced by the fact that you can parry less opponents per round.

RUE states that you can either parry multiple attackers or parry incoming attack and then get a counter-attack, but cannot do both. This seems even more odd considering you are already being penalized for how many people you can parry and IF the counter attack consumes the next melee action.

Any advise would be welcome.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Note that what you are calling 'abilities' are really just situations.

Attack and Parry sit. #1
1. Counter attacking, re'po'se (%^& french words' spelling…sound it out), a combo move that parries and attacks (a Parry-Strike) if the parry has ben made is <far as I know> is only found in the N&S/MC books.
No, it is a combo-move, not an automatic move.
2. Far as I know the above combo-move takes up the next APM since it is an attack.
Note: N&S and MC both have parry and auto-parry as two different moves.

Now if you mean your char is going to Parry and simultaneous attack the char…that is different.

The one for attack and another for parry is for when your char is attacking with one and reserving the other to parry a simultaneous attack.

sit #2
The char looses the ability to parry when making a simultaneous attack with both (all) their arms with melee weapons. Roll a strike for each arms making an attack.

sit.#3
The char looses the ability to parry when making a simultaneous attack with both (all) their arms with melee weapons at different targets.

1: if both attacks are made on the same target then it is a duel strike. see sit #2 above.
2: duel strike with two rolls for called strikes.
3: since you mean the () addendum, none from sit. #1.
4: see sit. #1 text above.

Sit. #4
Your char is on the defensive and is not attacking. this does mean you can parry multiple attackers. you can just stand there on the defensive and eat up the APM by saying you are not attacking.
Note that this is in the grey area of the rules since in RUE a char can parry as many attack that come in so long as they have 1 APM left. So GMs can make their own rulings to cover this situation.
1: I don't know where you are getting the numbers for a 'commonly trained fighter' so cannot look at what text you are taking it from.
*wonders why you said the same Q two different ways*
From reading the RUE text on parry in the combat section and integrating what is said in the paired weapons WP text, a char w/o paired weapons can only parry one attacker if their opponents are attacking simultaneously.


Far as I know ALL attacks eat up an APM, no matter what they are. (excluding ranged ancient weapons with a RoF in the WP, Then things get weird.)
Note the above answers are in line with the Paired weapons and simultaneous strike text in the combat section of the RUE book

[XarXar]

Thank you for your reply. I am limiting the sources of information to Second edition fantasy and RUE. There are other elements in N&S/MC that are not in consideration.

I disagree to some of your statements mostly because I cant find source to verify them in canon.

If regards to your Sit #1 nothing in canon defines combo-moves that I can find.

Sit #2 Why does a person looses the ability to parry when making a simultaneous attack? If you don't have the paired weapon skill and you make a simultaneous attack you don't forfeit auto-parry. If you only have one weapon you are allowed to make an attack AND parry 3 opponents assuming you have at least basic training in hand to hand. So if you have paired weapons and you attack with both weapons you are unable to parry at all?

Sit #3 You should define targets in my example I believe I referred to the hit location optional rule that would in theory cause each attack to go after different targets on the same opponent which would have different hit requirements based off of location.

Sit #4 I do not understand your view of this situation/ability. This if anything is a penalty as written. A player without paired weapons can parry 3 attackers in an attack sequence however if this skill is acquired reduces it from the default base of 3 to 2. You don't choose to spend the turn defending you are just penalized for having the skill.

How do you define opponents attacking simultaneously? In my mind the only way for this phase to be accurate is if it considers any attack on you during the attack sequence to be simultaneous and in that case RUE is very clear in the multi attacker rule you can parry up to 3 opponents. If I am mistaking in my understanding of this phrase please correct me.

[42dragon]

Below are my interpretations of the paired weapons rules.

1. Strike and Parry - This is talking about simultaneous attacks. Normally if you simultaneous attack you can't defend, but with paired weapons you can parry one attack with one weapon and simultaneous attack with the other. Yes, this uses up an attack (I usually rule your next attack).
2. Twin, simultaneous strikes - This is one attack with both weapons at the same time. Unless your opponent also has paired weapons at best they can only parry one of your weapons. But doing this leaves you open and unable to automatic parry until your next turn. (I only make one roll for both weapons)
3. Strike two different targets - This uses one attack action to attack two different targets at once (roll once for each target). But like item #2 this leaves you open and unable to automatic parry. Or in a combination of items #1 and #2 you can parry one opponent and simultaneous strike another, but still leaving yourself open after. In order to target the same target with both weapons you use item #2.
4. Parry 2 different attackers - This rarely comes up, but if two opponents are coordinating their attacks (no specific rules for this in the RAW round robin format) and they are simultaneously attacking you then you could parry both of them. Normally you can parry up to three attackers you can see but not at the same time which in the round robin format is the most common.

[drewkitty ~..~]

S1 Cause combo moves are only in N&S/MC.

'Parry-simultaneous attack' would be the words that fit the mechanics for a char with WP PW parrying the attacker's attack & attacking the attacker with a simu-attack.

S2 "simultaneous attack with both (all) their arms" it is (para-)phrased to cover multiple situations due to that there are races with more then one pair of arms. In other words (rephrasing what I said) a dual attack leaves one open to a simu-attack, even if it is really a quad- or hex-attack.
Note that there is no 'auto-parry' in RUE. There is only parry.
Yes, The parry does not take up any APM and can be done so long as the char has an APM left.)
Note, the attempting to parry up to three attackers is only from ones the char can see.


S3 Attacking the same individual is a dual strike vs that individual. Even if each hand is doing a called shot to different locations on that target individual. Therefore not a S3 situation.
I hope that clears up what I said.
S3 is in reference to attacking two different individuals simultaneously, or to attacking one individual, while simultaneously parrying another, different, individual.

S4 If you are using both (all) your arms to Parry then you are not attacking during your APM attack.
There is no mechanic in the game system for a player to delay the use of their char's APM.

simu-attacks from multiple opponents: "At the same time" "as if the attacks are a dual attack from a char with paired weapons".
To do this it takes having the player say that he is going to simu-with another player's attack vs the same individual (and the GM allowing it). But mostly players don't think of that because of the <turn/init order>….so ends up a NPC thing (if the GM thinks of it). Otherwise the attacks are considered sequenced or one after the other. Thus, the ability for a char trained in hand to hand combat to be able to parry up to three attackers that is within their field of vision (that they can see).

[XarXar]

Thank you both for the additional information. I would love to hear others view points as well.

As it was stated there are no rules that govern delaying ones turn in the attack sequence there are also no rules that state you can declare a simu-attack against the same opponent that I can find can you provide a source? even if it is inferred that would be helpful. because you understanding of some aspects of paired weapons seems to be based in unwritten rules. While you assume a simultaneous attack consumes a melee action it is not actually defined in the rules that it does like Disarm and Entangle. That being said I am not saying your assumption is incorrect just pointing out that it is not written in said manner as the other abilities set precedent.

Situation/ability 4 defines the process of parrying two attacks as if someone was doing a twin strike on you. however at the same time due to verbiage reduces the number of possible parry attempts per attack sequence from 3 to 2 if that was the intention or not I do not know.

So how is it someone with 1 weapon can attack and defend 3 people but a person with masterly in paired weapons can not attack and defend 3 people? what am I missing where is the advantage to paired weapons? In a one on one fight the person with paired weapons has a debatable advantage but does have an advantage. However two on one or three on one and the person with paired weapons when compared to someone without is at a disadvantage and the more opponents the worse it gets when compared to the same player but without paired weapons.

[drewkitty ~..~]

A person with paired weapons & two weapons can parry consecutive attacks from three differnt people just like those with just one weapon in one melee cycle.

It is just when there are three attacks simultaneously that they can only parry two of them.
Where the char with just one weapon (& w/o WP PW) would be only able to parry one of the three attacks that were made simultaneously.

At least that is the only way (I see) to make all the text ""work"" together. Otherwise you get to complain about changes made by KS and crew to one bit of text that had un-inteneded complications to other bits of text that didn't have complications before. Which is 'par for the course' when talking about the PB rules system.


defining:
melee cycle: one cycle is where starting with the char with the highest init, each player uses a APM.

[XarXar]

I guess the crux of the matter is our different views on what simultaneous attacks are in general. Since there are no rules that say 3 players or 3 NPCs can decide to wait and attack at the same point in time as a simultaneous attack on a single target as you appear to define the phrase. I view a simultaneous attack as in any attack against the target in the roughly 3 second window. IE

if E1 (Enemy 1) attacks the target P1 and E2 attacks the target P1 that effectively E1 and E2 simultaneously attacked P1. So if P1 has paired weapons he can parry both. However that limited understanding does not address a single weapon person being able to parry 3 enemies in the same time frame with a single weapon. (Assuming the initiative order was E1,E2,P1)

However if you have some canon that defines what constitutes a simultaneous attack made by Two playing characters working in tandem. I would be more then happy to revise my understanding of how such an even can occur. To be honest both positions are assumptions at best.

[Prysus]

Greetings and Salutations. I'm at work and don't have time (lunch is almost over) or books available for a detailed response at the moment. However, I figured I'd address the parrying two attackers part real quick.

While multiple people holding actions to coordinate into simultaneous attacks is logical, and implied by the text, there's another possibility that's often overlooked.

You can only auto-parry (parry without spending an action) if you're trained in Hand to Hand. Otherwise, parrying costs an action. As such, Paired Weapons can help offset this limitation.

Meh, real quick while I'm here. Attacks per Melee indicate how many attacks you can make in a melee round. Simultaneous Attacks are attacks (it's right in the name, and the description tells you it's an attack as well). If you can't get around the fact that an attack is an attack, you can't get around an attack costing an attack. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[XarXar]

Prysus, thank you for adding your voice.

When you get home if you don't mind could you provide the book reference that you are referring to in regards to 'While multiple people holding actions to coordinate into simultaneous attacks is logical, and implied by the text' I would love to review that text to see where your coming from.

As for the overlooked option in RUE the selection of paired weapons is limited to men of arms classes. which I could be wrong but I believe all come with at least basic hand to hand. so the scenario in which you could pick paired weapons as a skill and not have hand to hand basic is unknown to me.

I agree 100% that Attacks per melee indicate how many attacks you can make in a melee round. However if the assumption and I am not saying it is incorrect if the word Attack appears in the title that means it consumes an action to perform is not clearly stated. Lets take Back Flip: Escape as an example... I personally view this in the line of dodging so I would assume it costs an action to perform like dodges do in fantasy. lets review the text... sure enough the next to last line clearly states doing a back flip counts as one melee action. ok so they had to state it because the word 'Attack' was not in the name. Lets look at Back Flip: Attack... Well the word attack appears in the name so we could assume that it costs one melee action... lets review the text, huh sure enough the text defining it clearly states it uses up one melee attack/action even though the word attack appears in the name.

My point is they included the phrase almost everywhere else in which it was a defensive maneuver but the basic simultaneous attack. which please lets not confuse it with "Twin, simultaneous" attack which is a different item.

If counter attacking did not cost a melee action as one would assume it should then I could see justification on penalizing the defensive capabilities of someone with paired weapons however if it does cost a turn as one would think why is there so much penalty to defense of a character that specializes in paired weapons?

Yes, I am aware of FAQ #88. However Since they are not time stamped I have no clue what version of canon this was based on. And it would not be the first time that something was later altered to make these FAQ answers incorrect.

[kiralon]

Melee Attack: During combat, every attack action (strike, dodge,
entangle) counts as one melee attack or action. Parries are automatic
and don't count as a melee attack or action.

Is in the book, page 46
So every attack action uses an attack, including simultaneous.

Attacking simultaneously, Simultaneous attack and twin simultaneous attacks are 3 separate things.
1st, just going by the rules is when a couple of attackers attack you with the same initiative roll
2nd, Is when someone attacks you and you forego any defence and hit them at the same time
3rd, Is 1 strike roll that hits with 2 weapons at the same time.

They are all attacks and they all use up an action. You might say the blurb for the ability doesn't implicitly say it does use an action, but the blurb quoted from the book above does for all attacks, so for it not to use an attack the ability text would have to say it doesn't use an action, which it doesn't do.
but in fairly normal form for palladium it also implies that all parries are automatic and don't cost an action which is mostly true except as mentioned when you don't have a hth style.

I must say I house rule and let people hold so they can attack at the same time with friends.

[XarXar]

Thank you Kiralon, that is a solid answer to the question if it consume an action to counter attack or simultaneous attack.

So what that leaves unanswered then is that the next attack/action or just one from the round? There is a difference in application.

Also still in answered why is it that paired weapons is penalized in regards to defense?

If you counter attack you lose auto-parry if you twin, simultaneous strike you lose auto-parry. However if you do not have paired weapons and you use simultaneous attack you can still parry as normal against other opponents that melee cycle/attack sequence.

In your first example... the number 1 version... I don't understand where you are getting this from and could use farther guidance. There is no option to delay in this game as far as I am aware so you are saying they must have the same initiative roll? but is there a selection in the rules that explains this?

[Prysus]

Greetings and Salutations. I'm home now and have my books. I'll start by responding to the original questions, and then addressing replies from further in the discussion.

Questions:
Ability (1)
1. Does Counter attacking use a combat turn if the parry is triggered by Automatic Parry?

Yes. Attacks use Attacks per Melee. Note: I will expand on this in more detail further down.

2. If Counter attacking consume a melee action is that the next action or just one from the melee round (15 seconds)?

Palladium isn't entirely clear on the matter. However, based on logic (to me at least), and other examples when Palladium does clarify (such as Parry without hand to hand, Dodge, and Entangle, as well as RGMG clarifying next attack for Roll with Punch and techniques that cause victims to lose an attack), I'd say the next action. As for why I think it's more logical (which is my opinion), this is because I find it simpler (and more sensical) to just figure it's the character's next attack. Basically, instead of waiting until it's safe to attack (your action), you're attacking now. Basically, throwing caution to the wind and, as a result, your attack happens a little sooner than it would have otherwise.

Ability (2)
1. It is said that when you use Twin, simultaneous strikes you lose automatic parry and leave yourself open to the NEXT attack. Does that mean the next immediate attack or all incoming attacks until your next turn?

Honestly, I can't say. The wording on page 346 would suggest only the very next attack, and only by the person who you performed the technique on. So, if you're fighting A, B, and C; and you twin strike A, you can still parry B and C, just not A. However, the wording on page 327 (last sentence of the first column, and extends ever so slightly onto the second column) suggests that you're vulnerable to a second opponent (in this case, B would be the next opponent), but doesn't suggest you're vulnerable to C, or even A.

Based on these two sentences together (and some more stuff I'll say later), I'd say by attacking twice you're effectively making yourself vulnerable until your next attack/action. Note: You can still dodge.

Ability (3)
1. Can you target a single opponent with both attacks?

Yes. See ability #2.

2. If you are using the optional hit location rule could you target different locations on a single opponent in fact having different targets?

The ability states two different targets, but doesn't specify they have to be on different opponents. So I'd have to say yes. Note: Technically this ability doesn't state it only costs one action. So it's possible this will cost two actions, as the book is not entirely clear on the matter.

3. How is Ability 3 different from Ability 1 in the fact that both can be used to parry an attack and attack something else?

Minor difference only. Ability one works on a single target, while this is dividing those actions to two different targets. However, this one doesn't create the simultaneous attack (making it so the target can't defend), and would allow the opponent to defend normally. See below for an explanation why this might be listed separately.

4. Does this ability consume a melee action if you are triggering it from a parry? Disarm and Entangle both have verbiage when used defensively that they consume a melee action. however similar text is missing from Paired Weapons.

Yes. See the answer to #1.

Ability (4)
1. Was this an over sight that a specially skilled fighter with two weapons can only parry 2 attacks while a more commonly trained fighter can parry 3?

Possibly an oversight, but I'm doubting it. Prior to this conversation I had thought it was a by product from older editions, and its continued inclusion a mere oversight with no real use beyond characters with no hand to hand skill. However, I read the description in RUE, and the first full sentence on page 327 suggests this is an intentional limitation. This line wasn't in previous books (possibly BtS2 or Splicers, as I don't use those books). Possibly included as a balance issue, but hard to say with Palladium.

2. If a person with a single weapon can skillful parry 3 opponents how is it a person skilled with paired weapons forget how to do this and can only parry 2 (1 per weapon)?

I'm not sure I'm fond of this rule, but if I had to explain it ...

This could follow the concept of Jack of All Trades, master of none. Just because a person is skilled at doing a complex task, doesn't mean they're equally as skilled at that task as they are with a simpler task. Using two weapons at the same time will require just a little more effort, a little more focus, a little more awkward, and that little bit is enough for a third attacker to get an attack in. But honestly, I'm just guessing.

Now I'm going to start addressing some of the other matters.

Why does a person looses the ability to parry when making a simultaneous attack? If you don't have the paired weapon skill and you make a simultaneous attack you don't forfeit auto-parry. If you only have one weapon you are allowed to make an attack AND parry 3 opponents assuming you have at least basic training in hand to hand. So if you have paired weapons and you attack with both weapons you are unable to parry at all?

When performing a Simultaneous Attack, you're giving up your defense to hit your opponent. That's how Simultaneous Attacks work (RUE page 347 for reference, you're giving up your defense). As for the situation with attacking with BOTH weapons and giving up your auto-parry, that's found on page 346. Think of a boxing match. One hand back to defend, the other punches. In this case, you're abandoning defense and committing to combat. I'm not personally sure that Paired Weapons needs this restriction, but it's there.

Simultaneous Attack page 347 RUE does not state that is takes a melee action to perform unlike the text in disarm and entangle. Why would the simultaneous attacks provided by paired weapons consume an melee attack?

I agree 100% that Attacks per melee indicate how many attacks you can make in a melee round. However if the assumption and I am not saying it is incorrect if the word Attack appears in the title that means it consumes an action to perform is not clearly stated. Lets take Back Flip: Escape as an example... I personally view this in the line of dodging so I would assume it costs an action to perform like dodges do in fantasy. lets review the text... sure enough the next to last line clearly states doing a back flip counts as one melee action. ok so they had to state it because the word 'Attack' was not in the name. Lets look at Back Flip: Attack... Well the word attack appears in the name so we could assume that it costs one melee action... lets review the text, huh sure enough the text defining it clearly states it uses up one melee attack/action even though the word attack appears in the name.

My point is they included the phrase almost everywhere else in which it was a defensive maneuver but the basic simultaneous attack. which please lets not confuse it with "Twin, simultaneous" attack which is a different item.

Yes, all simultaneous attacks require a melee action, because all attacks and actions (unless otherwise specified) require an attack/action. This ability is no exception. However, I will now get into this matter with a bit more depth than earlier. I find there's a few flaws in your logic.

1: You say you agree that Attacks Per Melee indicate how many attacks you can make in a melee round, but then the remainder of your argument is based on that not being the case.
2: Simply because a rule is restated for clarity (something costing an attack/action) does not mean that the rule has become null and void as a result of the restatement. The rule does not need to be stated every time, even if they restate it sometimes.
3: Abilities such as Automatic Dodge state they don't use an attack. Simultaneous Attacks does NOT make this statement. So in the absence of a statement, use the default rule (attacks/actions cost attacks/actions, which you said you agree with).
4: Techniques such as punches, kicks, and holds don't generally state they take an action either (unless they cost more than one). Does that mean that I can punch an infinite number of times and the round will never end?
5: Simultaneous Attacks is NOT a complete maneuver. And what I mean by that is: What damage, or other combat penalty, does a Simultaneous Attack do? If you're thinking: Depends on the type of attack I make? This would be accurate, because Simultaneous Attack isn't complete on its own. It needs to be tied to something else. If that something else costs an attack/action, then Simultaneous Attack, by association to that technique, would also cost an attack/action. This is similar to Critical Strikes. Critical Strikes don't state they cost an attack action. So if you spend an attack and roll a critical, do you get that attack back?
6: In regards to specific case of Paired Weapons, RUE page 327, the write-up tells us that you cannot "counterstrike" if you've already used all your attacks, and that you can't hit back and can only parry. While it doesn't specifically say that the technique costs an action, I'd say the intent (along with the rules of the game) should be clear.

RUE states that you can either parry multiple attackers or parry incoming attack and then get a counter-attack, but cannot do both. This seems even more odd considering you are already being penalized for how many people you can parry and IF the counter attack consumes the next melee action.

I'm not sure I think it's a great ruling on the way they did everything, but from the various statements I'd say the concept is ...

This is a special type of combat. The only options available to you are the 4 options listed. Effectively, you can make one action with each weapon per turn. Whether it's an attack or a parry only matters in whether or not you're spending an attack (parrying twice with an auto-parry wouldn't spend an attack/action, but would stop you from attacking that round). Basically, you get to pick whether you're using 1, 2, 3, or 4. Whichever you pick, you're limited to that option until you're next turn.

So if you attack with both weapons (using both weapons once), you're leaving yourself open to attack (can't use either to parry) from anyone who can attack (see the above statements from RUE pages 327 and 346). If you simultaneous attack and parry (using both weapons once), you can't defend against other opponents (see RUE, page 327, third paragraph of the "Note"). This also explains why abilities 2 & 3 are listed separately, even though there's a fair bit of overlap.

When you get home if you don't mind could you provide the book reference that you are referring to in regards to 'While multiple people holding actions to coordinate into simultaneous attacks is logical, and implied by the text' I would love to review that text to see where your coming from.

Well, I only remembered the older text by heart. That's rather vague, and the only way #4 would be useful would be is if it could parry against two people attacking at the same time. Beyond that, it's logical in the sense of people can coordinate. Ready, aim, fire? I don't find it illogical at all to believe people in a game world would be able to do this as well.

However, reading through the write-up in RUE again, focusing specifically one some of these factors, I've reconsidered this stance if we're taking the RUE to be the true intent. I posted that above, and am willing to admit I might've been wrong.

As for the overlooked option in RUE the selection of paired weapons is limited to men of arms classes.

That's a restriction within Rifts though. That did not exist before RUE (with the possible exception of BtS2 and/or Splicers). As such, explaining uses for a skill worked at the time of written seems fair, instead of worrying about how a new rule applies to a skill that was written before the new rule.

Hopefully that helps. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[Prysus]

Thank you Kiralon ...
[snip]
In your first example... the number 1 version... I don't understand where you are getting this from and could use farther guidance. There is no option to delay in this game as far as I am aware so you are saying they must have the same initiative roll? but is there a selection in the rules that explains this?

Greetings and Salutations. I think that's just a house rule for him. Per the rules (PF2 page 43 or RUE page 339, Initiative section) says that you re-roll in case of ties. As a result, there should be no natural initiatives. Though he may have an answer I overlooked. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[XarXar]

Prysus,

Thank you that was an excellent response to my myriad of questions.

So if you do not have paired weapons you can Simultaneously attack someone that is attacking you and still be able to parry up to 3 opponents until your next turn. But if you have paired weapons you can not parry and counter strike (Defensive Simultaneously attack) without giving up all chances to parry until your next turn.

And in addition someone with paired weapons can only parry 2 opponents regardless if they attacked or not.

So with all of this said what is the advantage of paired weapons considering the penalties. One on One I think a slight advantage goes to the person with paired weapons assuming they can deal more damage then the person they are fighting. They will get the first attack that can not be parried however the opponent then gets to make an attack that can not be parried so it is a race for damage. in a Two on One... the person with paired weapons is at a great disadvantage even more so then someone without it and it only gets worse the more log sided the battle. at least in a 3 on 1 you have the chance to parry all 3... however if you have paired weapons you will go down quick.

So any help you can provide on what the advantages to using paired weapons is at this time?

And I still don't know how you can have two opponent simultaneously attack a single target. Which I guess is key to understanding some of the combat rules.

[XarXar]

Yes, all simultaneous attacks require a melee action, because all attacks and actions (unless otherwise specified) require an attack/action. This ability is no exception. However, I will now get into this matter with a bit more depth than earlier. I find there's a few flaws in your logic.

1: You say you agree that Attacks Per Melee indicate how many attacks you can make in a melee round, but then the remainder of your argument is based on that not being the case.
2: Simply because a rule is restated for clarity (something costing an attack/action) does not mean that the rule has become null and void as a result of the restatement. The rule does not need to be stated every time, even if they restate it sometimes.
3: Abilities such as Automatic Dodge state they don't use an attack. Simultaneous Attacks does NOT make this statement. So in the absence of a statement, use the default rule (attacks/actions cost attacks/actions, which you said you agree with).
4: Techniques such as punches, kicks, and holds don't generally state they take an action either (unless they cost more than one). Does that mean that I can punch an infinite number of times and the round will never end?
5: Simultaneous Attacks is NOT a complete maneuver. And what I mean by that is: What damage, or other combat penalty, does a Simultaneous Attack do? If you're thinking: Depends on the type of attack I make? This would be accurate, because Simultaneous Attack isn't complete on its own. It needs to be tied to something else. If that something else costs an attack/action, then Simultaneous Attack, by association to that technique, would also cost an attack/action. This is similar to Critical Strikes. Critical Strikes don't state they cost an attack action. So if you spend an attack and roll a critical, do you get that attack back?
6: In regards to specific case of Paired Weapons, RUE page 327, the write-up tells us that you cannot "counterstrike" if you've already used all your attacks, and that you can't hit back and can only parry. While it doesn't specifically say that the technique costs an action, I'd say the intent (along with the rules of the game) should be clear.

Just to clarify some points.

1: I do agree that Attacks Per Melee indicate how many attacks you can make in a melee round. I was more arguing the difference between offensive and defensive maneuvers.
2: Restating a rule does not make it null and void and I never argued that it did. I never stated that a twin simultaneous attack would not cost an action because it is a form of an offensive maneuver just like punches, kicks, and body throws. unlike critical, knockout, and death which are modifiers to a maneuvers.
3: I concur, however they could still of added the line to remove the chance of simpletons like me.
4: you got me here I cant spin that except if you think about the concept of offensive and defensive maneuvers. the line stating this costs a melee action is added to all maneuvers that could be considered defensive.
5: it a critical you should get it back! Just kidding... I hear you and understand the view point but what if the 'cost' instead of being a melee action is the fact that you are taking the full effects of the incoming hit. sort of like Aikido where you use your opponent's own force against him.
6: In the older FAQs there was a time in which there was a check to see if you still had available Attacks per melee for auto-parry to work. IE you could auto-parry as long as you still had available attacks even though one was not consumed by the action.

[kiralon]

Thank you Kiralon ...
[snip]
In your first example... the number 1 version... I don't understand where you are getting this from and could use farther guidance. There is no option to delay in this game as far as I am aware so you are saying they must have the same initiative roll? but is there a selection in the rules that explains this?

Greetings and Salutations. I think that's just a house rule for him. Per the rules (PF2 page 43 or RUE page 339, Initiative section) says that you re-roll in case of ties. As a result, there should be no natural initiatives. Though he may have an answer I overlooked. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

I make the long range attacks roll for initiative if there is more then one of them, and resolve them simultaneously if they get the same number, rather than make all long range attack simultaneous, because long range attacks automatically get initiative, also as long range seems to include flying jump kicks I also allow pike and polearm type weapons to go first as well, because if the flying jump kicks are long range attacks then pikes should be too, otherwise how do you figure out who goes first amongst a bunch of archers.

[Prysus]

So with all of this said what is the advantage of paired weapons considering the penalties. One on One I think a slight advantage goes to the person with paired weapons assuming they can deal more damage then the person they are fighting. They will get the first attack that can not be parried however the opponent then gets to make an attack that can not be parried so it is a race for damage.

Greetings and Salutations. In one on one, the advantage I'd say is definitely in favor of the Paired Weapons character. Option 1 is a safe bet. They attack, and you can parry the attack and simultaneous attack them back (which means they can't defend, unless they also have Paired Weapons. Opponent's turn again. If they attack, just keep doing it. You can defend (even if you fail sometimes), they can't (so short of failing the attack roll, you hit every time). If you wanted to go a bit riskier, you can always just do something like twin attacks with simultaneous attacks. Basically you'll hit the enemy twice for every single time they hit you.

Note: Strategy does play a part in this as well. So an enemy can try to switch things up with things like knock-down techniques (such as trip attacks that can only be dodged) to reduce the edge. Paired Weapons isn't an "I win" button even in one on one, but it's still an advantage.

Additionally, while this won't help you if you're outnumbered, if you're the one doing the outnumbering it might still provide options as well. So the lone (but powerful) enemy just attacked your teammate, this is the time to go in with a twin strike. RGMG even includes options for parrying for someone else (not automatic anymore and will cost an action). So you can go all dual blades while a lower hitting teammate with good defense parries for you.

The advantages are situational, but still useful. Without those penalties it's definitely much more powerful, to the point it's almost suicide to not take it.

And I still don't know how you can have two opponent simultaneously attack a single target. Which I guess is key to understanding some of the combat rules.

By the RAW, I don't think there's any way that's possible in Palladium. Though it remains a very common house rule (because it makes sense in the real world, and also promotes team tactics instead of just every man for himself).

4: you got me here I cant spin that except if you think about the concept of offensive and defensive maneuvers. the line stating this costs a melee action is added to all maneuvers that could be considered defensive.

Of course, simultaneous attacks are NOT a defensive maneuver. You do this instead of a defense.

6: In the older FAQs there was a time in which there was a check to see if you still had available Attacks per melee for auto-parry to work. IE you could auto-parry as long as you still had available attacks even though one was not consumed by the action.

o_O I can't say I've ever read that FAQ, but I don't doubt you. There's a reason the old FAQ are generally considered very unofficial. I don't believe there's ever been any support for that in the books. In fact, I can think of a few examples in Palladium that contradict that rule.

Anyways, that's all for now. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[kiralon]

Long range and sneak attacks automatically get initiative, flying jump kicks have to be done from long range as it says in their description (even though im pretty sure this is a copy paste error from Ninjas and superspies where you have multiple ranges for hand to hand combat). Get two flying jump kickers to attack someone and they both automatically get initiative, not to mention parrying arrows from 2 different people, So all long range attacks go first, which does imply simultaneous. Most people I play with are happy to have it so only if you have your weapon loaded and aiming do you automatically get initiative

From page 43
"Any time opponents square off for battle, the Game Master must determine
who has the initiative. In other words, who will attack first.
Successful Sneak Attacks or Long-Range Attacks will always have initiative
for that melee round (15 seconds). Otherwise, whoever rolls
highest on a twenty-sided die will attack first. In the case of a tie, reroll.
Initiative is rolled only once per melee round. That roll will determine
the pace for the entire melee."

I have never figured out If spell casting was supposed to be included as part of the long range attack group or not. I'd assume not but who knows.

[XarXar]

Greetings and Salutations. In one on one, the advantage I'd say is definitely in favor of the Paired Weapons character. Option 1 is a safe bet. They attack, and you can parry the attack and simultaneous attack them back (which means they can't defend, unless they also have Paired Weapons. Opponent's turn again. If they attack, just keep doing it. You can defend (even if you fail sometimes), they can't (so short of failing the attack roll, you hit every time). If you wanted to go a bit riskier, you can always just do something like twin attacks with simultaneous attacks. Basically you'll hit the enemy twice for every single time they hit you.

.

Sorry... I was following you until your example. lets break it down so I can fully understand. Lets assume both the player known as P1 and the enemy known as E1 have 5 attacks per melee.
P1 has paired weapons and E1 does not.

initiative roll P1 15, E1 10

P1 attacks, E1 Parry
E1 attacks, P1 parries and counter attacks forfeiting his parry until his next turn per page RUE 327. Since We said the Next melee was consumed by the counter.
P1 turn is skipped
E1 attacks, This is where I get confused because to me P1 should not be able to parry yet. and gets hit by E1
P1 Attacks, E1 parry
E1 attack, P1 parries and counter attacks
P1 turn is skipped
E1 attacks, P1 can not parry yet.
and so on....

What am I getting wrong?

[Prysus]

Sorry... I was following you until your example. lets break it down so I can fully understand. Lets assume both the player known as P1 and the enemy known as E1 have 5 attacks per melee.
P1 has paired weapons and E1 does not.

initiative roll P1 15, E1 10

P1 attacks, E1 Parry
E1 attacks, P1 parries and counter attacks forfeiting his parry until his next turn per page RUE 327. Since We said the Next melee was consumed by the counter.
P1 turn is skipped
E1 attacks, This is where I get confused because to me P1 should not be able to parry yet. and gets hit by E1
P1 Attacks, E1 parry
E1 attack, P1 parries and counter attacks
P1 turn is skipped
E1 attacks, P1 can not parry yet.
and so on....

What am I getting wrong?

Greetings and Salutations. I'm in bed and have OT in the morning. This is probably my last response until tomorrow afternoon (or later), but will give this a quick try and going from memory. I can double check facts tomorrow if there appear to be any discrepancies.

Okay, forget Paired Weapons for a moment. Now redo your example with P1 simultaneous attacking every chance he gets. Does your example come off different? P1 should be able to simultaneous attack every time (maybe not first and last attack depending on initiative). If you disagree, we can start there for problem solving.

If you agree so far, let's return to Paired Weapons. P1 will continue the simultaneous attack method, only now he can defend while he performs the simultaneous attack. That's what option 1 is. When an opponent attacks, you can both party AND simultaneous attack. I don't recall there being any restrictions in option 1 that stops you from parrying next turn.

Don't treat the "counterstrike" as an extra move in addition to a normal attack. Basically just treat it like a regular simultaneous attack, but you get the added benefit of a defense.

If you feel like there's some text that disagrees with my take, let me know and I'll try to address it tomorrow. Farewell and safe journeys.

[XarXar]

I agree with how non-paired weapons would play out.

I guess after rereading...the line that was throwing me off was...

"Characters with W.P. Paired Weapons can EITHER parry multiple attackers or parry an incoming attack and then get a counter-attack, but cannot do both. "

but I guess that may only apply in two on one... but it still does not feel right to me...but we are close thanks to your help.

[42dragon]

Sorry... I was following you until your example. lets break it down so I can fully understand. Lets assume both the player known as P1 and the enemy known as E1 have 5 attacks per melee.
P1 has paired weapons and E1 does not.

initiative roll P1 15, E1 10

P1 attacks, E1 Parry
E1 attacks, P1 parries and counter attacks forfeiting his parry until his next turn per page RUE 327. Since We said the Next melee was consumed by the counter.
P1 turn is skipped
E1 attacks, This is where I get confused because to me P1 should not be able to parry yet. and gets hit by E1
P1 Attacks, E1 parry
E1 attack, P1 parries and counter attacks
P1 turn is skipped
E1 attacks, P1 can not parry yet.
and so on....

What am I getting wrong?

Action number in parenthesis.

P1 attacks (1), E1 parry - check
E1 attacks (1), P1 parries and simultaneous attacks (2)- check
P1 turn was used during the simultaneous attack - check
E1 attacks (2), P1 simultaneous attacks {since he is simultaneous attacking it is his action again and he can then use the auto-parry} and parries (3)
P1 turn was used during the simultaneous attack - check
E1 attacks (3), P1 simultaneous attacks {since he is simultaneous attacking it is his action again and he can then use the auto-parry} and parries (4)
P1 turn was used during the simultaneous attack - check
E1 attacks (4), P1 simultaneous attacks {since he is simultaneous attacking it is his action again and he can then use the auto-parry} and parries (5 - now out of attacks/actions)
P1 turn was used during the simultaneous attack - check
E1 attacks (5), P1 is out of attacks and cannot simultaneous {nor parry, although this may be debatable by GM's}

[42dragon]

You could also think of the melee round of 5 attacks in table form. Following the flow of time, when it gets back to the time P1's turn should have come up he can once again now auto-parry.

turns--------P1----------------------------E1--------------------------Notes
1------------attack, E1 parry-------------attack, P1 simul/parry----P1 has used 2 attack E1 has used 1 attack
2------------skipped (can now parry)----attack, P1 simul/parry----P1 has used 3 attack E1 has used 2 attack
3------------skipped (can now parry)----attack, P1 simul/parry----P1 has used 4 attack E1 has used 3 attack
4------------skipped (can now parry)----attack, P1 simul/parry----P1 has used 5 attack E1 has used 4 attack
5------------skipped-----------------------attack--------------------- E1 has used 5 attack

[XarXar]

Ok thank you all I think I am slowly getting it... So if we add E2 into the mix it would look like

initiative roll P1 15, E1 10, E2 9

P1 attacks, E1 Parry
E1 attacks, P1 parries and counter attacks forfeiting his parry until his next turn per page RUE 327.
E2 attacks, P1 can not parry and is hit
P1 turn is skipped
E1 attacks, P1 parries and counter attacks forfeiting his parry until his next turn per page RUE 327.
E2 attacks, P1 can not parry and is hit
P1 turn is skipped
E1 attacks, P1 parries and counter attacks forfeiting his parry until his next turn per page RUE 327.
E2 attacks, P1 can not parry and is hit
P1 turn is skipped
E1 attacks, P1 parries and counter attacks forfeiting his parry until his next turn per page RUE 327.
E2 attacks, P1 can not parry and is hit

And P1 is dead. Yes... a player may choose not to counter every time. but if he did not have paired weapon it would be roughly the same but E1 would hit instead of E2 assuming he always simu-attack E1 and Parried E2.

[Prysus]

Ok thank you all I think I am slowly getting it... So if we add E2 into the mix it would look like
[snip]
And P1 is dead. Yes... a player may choose not to counter every time. but if he did not have paired weapon it would be roughly the same but E1 would hit instead of E2 assuming he always simu-attack E1 and Parried E2.

Greetings and Salutations. That's more or less how things could go. If P1 is dead, then it's because he's either not thinking things through, or he was outclassed and going to die regardless. Paired Weapons is powerful against a single opponent, but that doesn't mean it's powerful in every situation. The uses are far more limited when fighting multiple opponents.

In a situation such as a tank being P1 (the kind of guy who will simultaneous attack even in a one on one fight because he can dish out and/or take more damage than most opponents), P1 can use option 2 and just simultaneous attack E1 each turn. P1 is taking two hits, but he's hitting one enemy twice as well. If he can take the damage, he can quickly kill E1, then switch over to something like option 1, and then parry while simultaneous attacking E2 (minimizing the damage he'll take now, while almost guaranteeing a hit on the enemy).

And, of course, there's the guy who has amazing combat bonuses and could parry both E1 and E2, and hit on his turn (a slower win, but safer). In this case, he might have Paired Weapons to defend against it, but in that two on one (where neither E1 nor E2 have Paired Weapons) he'll just use one weapon and not use the Paired Weapons skill. Nothing says you HAVE to use two weapons just because you have the Paired Weapons skill. Use the proper tool/skill for the proper situation.

However, I think the best way to look at Paired Weapons (from an understanding point of view) is this:

1: When using Paired Weapons, you lose auto-parry (forget it even exists!).
2: You have two weapons. Using both costs one attack/action per melee round. Whether you attack or parry doesn't matter, you can only use each weapon once. This means you can use both to attack, both to parry, or one to attack and one to parry. You cannot do more than that.

I didn't always view it as the above, but this thread has made me look at it that way, and the skill actually makes more sense when I do. I'll quote a few parts and explain them with that mentality.

1. Strike and parry simultaneously.[snip] In other words, those skilled in W.P. Paired Weapons can often perform two actions for every one melee action/attack.

... combatants skilled in Paired Weapons often can do two actions for every one of their melee attacks (i.e. strike and parry).

This tells us that we get two actions/attacks for every melee attack/action, and we have clarity that a "parry" is an action (they tell us that it's one of the two actions).

Characters with W.P. Paired Weapons can EITHER parry multiple attackers or parry an incoming attack and then get a counter-attack, but cannot do both.

So you can either parry multiple attackers (Option #4), or you can parry and attack (Option #1, and one of the choices in Option #3). Counter-attack (from what I can gather) isn't directed at a specific move, but telling us that if you defend against multiple opponents then you can't attack.

A character with W.P. Paired Weapons using both of his attacks simultaneously on someone is vulnerable to attack from a second opponent.

However, a twin, simultaneous strike with both weapons means losing automatic parry and leaves the character open to his opponent's next attack without benefit of a parry ...

So if you attack with two weapons (use Weapon A once, and Weapon B once), then you can't parry against E1 (RUE, 346) or any additional opponents (RUE, 327). So we're left with you can't use either one more than once.

When fighting three (or more) attackers, the character would be able to try to parry two of the attackers, but any other attacks would be unopposed.

So if you parry two opponents (Option #4) with Weapon A (used once) and Weapon B (used once), you can't parry a third (you can't use either one more than once). See above for why you can't attack back. Or, you used both weapons once so you can't use either again.

As I read it, the skill is making more and more sense with this mentality in mind, at least to me. Actually, I think it's making more sense to me now than it has any other time I've read it (with other interpretations). I'm not sure how I feel about this method of Paired Weapons, but I'm starting to think I like it (as it's not nearly as over-powered as most tend to rule it, myself included). Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[XarXar]

Thank you and this was a great conversation about paired weapons and parry in general I highly enjoyed reading it. I hope others find use in my questions and your answers.

We never did solve how two opponents can attack at the same time but beggars cant be choosers.

Thanks,

[eliakon]

Thank you and this was a great conversation about paired weapons and parry in general I highly enjoyed reading it. I hope others find use in my questions and your answers.

We never did solve how two opponents can attack at the same time but beggars cant be choosers.

Thanks,

Very carefully

[Veknironth]

Well, I like to pride myself on my Paired Weapons knowledge and I did once correct Kevin S in a game, have him tell me I was right after looking at the book, and then brag "Oh, I know my ******* paired weapons." So, I'll have a crack at this even though I don't have the books handy.

Ability 1 - Parry/Attack
1. Yes, the attack portion of this uses an attack.
2. It is the next one. It doesn't say so, but it also doesn't make any sense for a character to use his or her last action for his or her first attack. All attack actions take the next action.

This is most useful against an opponent without paired weapons. As Prysus said, it allows you to parry incoming attacks and strike the opponent without said opponent getting a chance to parry. It's like a free shot. I've seen PC's sacrifice initiative to entice the opponent to attack so that they can use this tactic. Notice that this ability does not sacrifice the automatic parry.

This also works in reverse, we have decided, in that if you attack and someone uses ability 1 against you, you can parry that incoming attack with your other weapon.

Ability 2 - Simultaneous, Double Strikes
1. The way I understand it, and how we have played it, is that you lose the automatic parry for the melee round, but without my books in front of me I can't say why. You are open to the next attack, but ideally, you have just dealt a double damage blow to the opponent.

It's a riskier move that usually is done to, the hope is, quickly dispatch an opponent. Note for this, you roll one die. After the double strike, you are back to normal, only your parries now cost an attack. However, if you are performing ability one even without the automatic parry, that still counts as one attack action. This is also great when facing someone who's bonuses are much lower than yours.

It also can be used to even the odds against multiple opponents. If you are facing 2 people with 4 apm each, and you can kill one of them with your first attack, you've prevented 4 attacks against you.

Ability 3 - Attack Two Targets
1. What you are saying is ability 2
2. This is a judgement call, since that is an optional table, but I'd say yes.
3. This differs from ability 1 because it is attacking two targets as opposed to one. Note, for this ability, you roll separately for each attack. (i.e. roll for an attack for target 1, and another for target 2)
4. I'm not sure what you mean about triggering it from a parry. However, it does use an attack action. However, even though you roll for each attack, it only uses one attack action.

Ability 4 - Parrying Two Weapons at a Time
1. This is essentially only useful in parrying someone who is trying a double attack (ability 2) on you. It's this, dodge, or hope the attacker rolls poorly.

Palladium FRPG didn't take into account fighting multiple attackers much at all. The RUE rule about parrying three attackers was written after the PFRPG books and they haven't been updated with that rule. So, I'd go with the newer rule, since there is none in the PFRPG book. This problem comes up often when merging rule sets from different books.

-Vek
"Paired Weapons makes a HUGE difference in combat. It's the single biggest determinant, in terms of skills, for the outcome of combat"

[Prysus]

Ability 1 - Parry/Attack
[snip]
Notice that this ability does not sacrifice the automatic parry.

Greetings and Salutations. If we consider RUE as clarification, they say you can't defend against multiple attackers though so ... meh, you don't lose auto-parry, but you can't use it against anyone other than the person you're simultaneous attacking.

Palladium FRPG didn't take into account fighting multiple attackers much at all. The RUE rule about parrying three attackers was written after the PFRPG books and they haven't been updated with that rule. So, I'd go with the newer rule, since there is none in the PFRPG book. This problem comes up often when merging rule sets from different books.

The real reason I responded ... PF2, page 46, "Multiple Attackers" definition. "The lone defender can parry all attacks that are within his line of vision. If an opponent slips far to one side or behind him, the defender cannot parry the strike because he is concentrating on the assailants in front of him."

I've usually figured the RUE is more of an expansion on this rule. I believe that RUE also limits to four attackers in melee range. So I figured one in front, two on the sides, and you can't parry the one behind you. That's just always been my take on it. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[Axelmania]

.

It is just when there are three attacks simultaneously that they can only parry two of them.
Where the char with just one weapon (& w/o WP PW) would be only able to parry one of the three attacks that were made simultaneously.
.

I struggle to think of examples of where this comes up.

In rifts xiticix invasion the warrior gained the ability to do triple/quadruple hits but I am pretty sure it said you could make a single parry roll to block all of them....