For example, attempting to attack two different enemies 15ft apart with a sword. I find Savage Worlds to be a lot more "open" - you're usually allowed to try an action, whereas in D&D you literally are Not Allowed unless you have XYZ level/feat. Savage Worlds doesn't really focus as much on that - it focuses on how hard/easy it is for you to do an action. Granted, I know far more about Savage World's system balance than D&D (in that it's a lot harder to break SW than it is D&D).ĭ&D "balances" things by limiting system resources (spell slots, "per-day" / "per-encounter" abilities, hit points). To simplify, D&D penalizes by less damage output / AC sacrifice, and SW penalizes by poorer "to hit" chances / Toughness sacrifice. This is because SW operates by "critical blows." In Savage Worlds, unless you take one of the Two-Fisted or Ambidextrous (or potentially Frenzy/Sweep/similar) edges, you have less chance of hitting. This is because D&D operates by the "death of a thousand cuts" mindset. In D&D 5e, unless you have the appropriate feat/fighting style, you output less damage on your offhand attack and you sacrifice the chance to up your AC by not having a shield. That's why it's not a default thing - in either system. Remember that it requires some "skill" to dual-wield weapons. Unlike D&D, in Savage Worlds there are no penalties to the damage when you dual-wield. Therefore, anything that means you get more chances to hit - regardless of whether there's penalties or not - is a good thing. Savage Worlds is all about delivering a critical blow that puts the hurt on an opponent. It is not the "death of a thousand paper cuts" that slivers off 2hp here, 5hp there. Remember that this is not D&D and there are no hit points. Dual wielding is much better when you're up against multiple weaker opponents (as you have the chance to eliminate 2 each turn).Īnd if he doesn't want to get the edges for some reason, if he just wild attacks each turn he'll win 670/1000 (once again: with no edges) against a not wild attacking opponent, or 550/100 against wild attacking opponent. Especially when you consider that the above scenario is a duel. So while the -4/-2 penalties might seem like a bitchslap, they're actually not that bad. And with both two fisted and ambidextrous he wins about 775/1000. With just two fisted added the dual wielding fighter wins 700/1000. A little bit worse than the no dual wielding option, but still pretty close to 50:50. With 2 fighters, both D12 fighting and both with 2 short swords (and no edges) the dual wielding one wins about 400/1000 fights. The penalties may seem harsh, but they are far from it. and if he really almost quit before starting, it's not really about the Edges - he'd rather play something else. Once pewter meets vinyl tell him he'll love taking twice the pelts of anyone else in the party. Look: Savage Worlds is ugliest at character creation. I mean, maybe if you can work up a genuine tear or two you could get your GM to waive the Ambidextrous Edge or something, but it sounds like you're complaining about the Edges without even trying them out. I mean, you can wait 'til you're Seasoned and get Frenzy, but my Two-Fisted character is going to get that, too. Why would anyone ever bother with 2 weapons?įor the extra attack each turn. The character with both Ambidextrous and Two-Fisted has no inherent penalty when making an attack with each hand in a turn. One with Two-Fisted ignores the multi-action penalty and makes her attacks at -0/-2. So -2/-4 to the attacks.Ī character with the Ambidextrous Edge ignores the off-hand penalty and is at -2/-2. A character with no relevant Edges would fight two-handed thus: a -2 multi-action penalty (assuming there is no third action this round like running) to both attacks and a -2 off-hand penalty to one attack.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |