Paired Attacks

[UbiquitousRat]

If you have a paired weapon, you can parry and strike simultaneously. Does it cost an attack to strike, or is it part of the parry and free?

[kiralon]

for one action you can do 2 strikes, or a parry and strike. You lose automatic parry however, so from that point on until initiative is rolled again it will cost an action to parry.
So no it doesn't cost 2 actions to do that.

[UbiquitousRat]

So, to be clear:
My hero runs up and attacks the opponent bearing sword and shield. I make the attack and then my opponent parries. During his action, my opponent strikes me; I parry with the shield. Can I now also strike simulateously?

Also:
My hero runs up and attacks the opponent, both bearing sword and shield. I make the attack and then my opponent parries... can he also simultaneously strike?

How would you handle these situations?

[kiralon]

So, to be clear:
My hero runs up and attacks the opponent bearing sword and shield. I make the attack and then my opponent parries. During his action, my opponent strikes me; I parry with the shield. Can I now also strike simulateously?
Yes, but that's not a paired weapon attack, its a simultaneous strike

Also:
My hero runs up and attacks the opponent, both bearing sword and shield. I make the attack and then my opponent parries... can he also simultaneously strike?
Yes.

How would you handle these situations?

When someone hits you can simultaneously strike them, normally its give up the option to parry and take it like a man, however since you both have shields you can both parry the simultaneous strike from the other person with a shield. That's built into wp shield.

However if you have paired weapons and you have 2 swords and your opponent has a sword and a shield you can twin strike him, and he has to parry with his weapon and shield to stop both attacks.

best case scenario (sort of) is when fighting a two handed weapon wielder, when they strike at you, you simultaneous strike back with 2 weapons and he cant parry either.

But your questions are more about simultaneous strikes than paired.
and wp shield includes using a shield in one hand and a weapon in the other

[UbiquitousRat]

for one action you can do 2 strikes, or a parry and strike. You lose automatic parry however, so from that point on until initiative is rolled again it will cost an action to parry.
So no it doesn't cost 2 actions to do that.

Thanks for the help so far - just trying to clarify the relationship between paired attacks and simultaneous strikes, I guess.

What I don't fully understand is the significance of doing a parry and strike, and losing automatic parry.

What does "parry and strike" mean? When a person strikes me, I get to parry. Does this mean, with two weapons, I can parry and then immediately strike? Having done so, I lose the automatic parry until the next initiative roll. Is that correct?

If so, how is that different from a simultaneous strike?

[kiralon]

for one action you can do 2 strikes, or a parry and strike. You lose automatic parry however, so from that point on until initiative is rolled again it will cost an action to parry.
So no it doesn't cost 2 actions to do that.

What does "parry and strike" mean? When a person strikes me, I get to parry. Does this mean, with two weapons, I can parry and then immediately strike? Having done so, I lose the automatic parry until the next initiative roll. Is that correct?

If so, how is that different from a simultaneous strike?

it just means you can parry and strike as part of a simultaneous strike, parry with one, hit with the other, but no more auto parry until end of round,
so yes, but you can only strike with the weapon you didn't parry with.

[UbiquitousRat]

Perfect! Many thanks for your patience!

[Alrik Vas]

Just to be certain, there is some wordiness in the paired weapons section.

First, when it says "twin, simultaneous strikes" it isn't refering to a "simultaneous attack", but just a twin attack, which takes away automatic parry until your next turn.

Second, when you parry and strike vs your opponent simultaneously, it doesn't say it uses your next action. Thusly you attack on your turn with one weapon. On their turn they attack, you parry/strike. Essentially you can get 2 attacks in the space you'd normally get one. It still uses 2 attacks in full, but it's a great way to destroy a single opponent, effectively doubling your damage agaisnt them while still defending yourself.

This is why having initiative is so important for paired weapon users.

[ShadowHawk]

But don't do like a player in our game did and rather foolishly try to parry a troll's spear with a wooden shield. What made it worse is the fact that he was playing a gnome.

[kiralon]

Just to be certain, there is some wordiness in the paired weapons section.

First, when it says "twin, simultaneous strikes" it isn't refering to a "simultaneous attack", but just a twin attack, which takes away automatic parry until your next turn.

Second, when you parry and strike vs your opponent simultaneously, it doesn't say it uses your next action. Thusly you attack on your turn with one weapon. On their turn they attack, you parry/strike. Essentially you can get 2 attacks in the space you'd normally get one. It still uses 2 attacks in full, but it's a great way to destroy a single opponent, effectively doubling your damage agaisnt them while still defending yourself.

This is why having initiative is so important for paired weapon users.

Well from memory in second ed when you do a twin action you can't parry the next attack against you and can only dodge, so no doubling up of attacks like that, as there are 2 descriptions of paired weapons in the 2nd ed book, and they are slightly different to each other. (p.46 and p.60, had to look it up)
But someone with a weapon and shield can do the same thing back if they have paired weapons as well.
My description is from first ed which is still mostly accepted by 2nd ed users.

[Alrik Vas]

Just to be certain, there is some wordiness in the paired weapons section.

First, when it says "twin, simultaneous strikes" it isn't refering to a "simultaneous attack", but just a twin attack, which takes away automatic parry until your next turn.

Second, when you parry and strike vs your opponent simultaneously, it doesn't say it uses your next action. Thusly you attack on your turn with one weapon. On their turn they attack, you parry/strike. Essentially you can get 2 attacks in the space you'd normally get one. It still uses 2 attacks in full, but it's a great way to destroy a single opponent, effectively doubling your damage agaisnt them while still defending yourself.

This is why having initiative is so important for paired weapon users.

Well from memory in second ed when you do a twin action you can't parry the next attack against you and can only dodge, so no doubling up of attacks like that, as there are 2 descriptions of paired weapons in the 2nd ed book, and they are slightly different to each other. (p.46 and p.60, had to look it up)
But someone with a weapon and shield can do the same thing back if they have paired weapons as well.
My description is from first ed which is still mostly accepted by 2nd ed users.

Except i wasn't talking about a twin attack at that point. i was saying:

character A has 2 weapons.
Character B has 1 weapon.

A goes first

Character A attacks with 1 weapon. B attempts to defend.

Next is B's turn.

Character B attacks with 1 weapon. Character A attempts to defend, then counter with his second weapon in the same action.

No twin attack in there anywhere.

[MADMANMIKE]

I had a lengthy conversation with Kevin about this and he confirmed that in all instances, enacting a simultaneous attack (whether it be ignoring the damage from the opponents attack or using Paired Weapons to parry and attack) does use one of the players action/attacks.

Character 1: 3APM and Paired Weapons, sword and shield

Character 2: 3APM and no Paired Weapons, just a sword

Character 1 has initiative and hits character 2 with one weapon (preserving his automatic parry). Character 2 parries.
Character 2 gets his turn and attacks Character 1 with a sword; Character 1 parries the attack with his shield and strikes back, doing damage that cannot be defended against.

That's the first attack, but Character 1 also used his second attack in the simultaneous attack, so it's Character 2's turn again. Character 2 again strikes Character 1. Character 1 again parries with his shield and simultaneously strikes Character 2, using his last attack this melee.

That leaves Character 2 with one attack left, and if he's got any sense he'll use it to retreat.

Now if Character 1 were using two weapons instead of sword and shield, it could play out a bit different; on the first attack, if he makes a double strike, he can no longer parry Character 2's attacks, unless he wants to use an attack to do so (same as dodging). It's a gamble; if he's reserving the second weapon to parry he essentially gets two attacks against Character 2 that cannot be defended against, but if he decides to forgo parrying, he's essentially doubling his damage roll using two weapons (assuming they both do the same damage).. This is where '2 actions per attack' comes in, as hitting with two weapons at once counts as one attack, as does strike and parry; it's just that the strike in the strike and parry doesn't come automatic like the parry does.

[kiralon]

Just curious, where does the lose autoparry and can only dodge come into it, wp doesn't mention that at all, only the combat description, (we play you do anything using paired weapons, rather than twin striking and you lose autoparry, but ignore the can only dodge bit, you can parry as well but it costs an action)
The book does specifically state twin strike rolls to lose autoparry and can only dodge, but the rules for simultaneous strikes rules out defensive manoeuvres, so a simultaneous parry/strike wouldn't be possible either (I ignore this bit of simultaneous strikes myself, its just well confusingly written).

[MADMANMIKE]

Just curious, where does the lose autoparry and can only dodge come into it, wp doesn't mention that at all, only the combat description...

As you say, it's in the combat description. Not appearing in the W.P. description does not negate what's in the combat description.

That said, think about it from a different angle. You charge into combat, a sword and short sword in your hands. Taking the initiative you do a cross-slash attack with your hands coming down together to cut with both blades in a parallel arc (your double strike). You've used your attack and forfeited your automatic parry, because the automatic parry is nothing more than having a weapon or shield at the ready to deal with an incoming attack. By using that weapon to make an attack, you no longer have it at the ready. If you want to parry at that point it's no longer a reflexive action, it's a conscious choice and thus, like dodging, requires an action.

(we play you do anything using paired weapons, rather than twin striking and you lose autoparry, but ignore the can only dodge bit, you can parry as well but it costs an action)

Okay, I'm thinking now that you weren't replying to my post as I said the same thing:

Now if Character 1 were using two weapons instead of sword and shield, it could play out a bit different; on the first attack, if he makes a double strike, he can no longer parry Character 2's attacks, unless he wants to use an attack to do so (same as dodging).

The book does specifically state twin strike rolls to lose autoparry and can only dodge, but the rules for simultaneous strikes rules out defensive manoeuvres, so a simultaneous parry/strike wouldn't be possible either (I ignore this bit of simultaneous strikes myself, its just well confusingly written).

Simultaneous attack is a different option and thus does not apply to the use of Paired Weapons; it's when you forgo parry and dodge and choose to hit them while they're hitting you. Using Paired Weapons, one may make a 'dual strike', hitting with both weapons, or one can make a simultaneous attack during an opponents attack while using the second weapon to parry the opponents attack.

[Lukterran]

Real men simultaneous attack with every action!! Who needs to parry or dodge when you can attack!

[kiralon]

Just curious, where does the lose autoparry and can only dodge come into it, wp doesn't mention that at all, only the combat description...

As you say, it's in the combat description. Not appearing in the W.P. description does not negate what's in the combat description.

That said, think about it from a different angle. You charge into combat, a sword and short sword in your hands. Taking the initiative you do a cross-slash attack with your hands coming down together to cut with both blades in a parallel arc (your double strike). You've used your attack and forfeited your automatic parry, because the automatic parry is nothing more than having a weapon or shield at the ready to deal with an incoming attack. By using that weapon to make an attack, you no longer have it at the ready. If you want to parry at that point it's no longer a reflexive action, it's a conscious choice and thus, like dodging, requires an action.

(we play you do anything using paired weapons, rather than twin striking and you lose autoparry, but ignore the can only dodge bit, you can parry as well but it costs an action)

Well I was replying to you as the combat description says that if you do a twin strike you lose auto parry, cant parry but can dodge, it doesn't say using paired so it could be argued that a parry/strike isn't a twin strike, nor is parrying 2 separate people simultaneously, so it doesn't activate the lose automatic parry and you must dodge bit (and I ignore the dodge bit, spend an action and you can still parry).
I was just saying that I play it so that if you do anything involving using both weapons at the same time its kicks in the negative.

Okay, I'm thinking now that you weren't replying to my post as I said the same thing:

Now if Character 1 were using two weapons instead of sword and shield, it could play out a bit different; on the first attack, if he makes a double strike, he can no longer parry Character 2's attacks, unless he wants to use an attack to do so (same as dodging).

The book does specifically state twin strike rolls to lose autoparry and can only dodge, but the rules for simultaneous strikes rules out defensive manoeuvres, so a simultaneous parry/strike wouldn't be possible either (I ignore this bit of simultaneous strikes myself, its just well confusingly written).

Simultaneous attack is a different option and thus does not apply to the use of Paired Weapons; it's when you forgo parry and dodge and choose to hit them while they're hitting you. Using Paired Weapons, one may make a 'dual strike', hitting with both weapons, or one can make a simultaneous attack during an opponents attack while using the second weapon to parry the opponents attack.

Well I was sort of responding to you because

[sHaka]

I had a lengthy conversation with Kevin about this ..... SNIP..

Excellent explanation, Mike! Hope if we do get a PFUE, the combat rules are laid out clearly and with plenty of examples like this one

[MADMANMIKE]

Well I was sort of responding to you because

..still waiting with baited breath for the explanation..

I had a lengthy conversation with Kevin about this ..... SNIP..

Excellent explanation, Mike! Hope if we do get a PFUE, the combat rules are laid out clearly and with plenty of examples like this one

I'm hoping to be a part of that, but even if I'm not able to contribute I am looking forward to it!

[Glistam]

Just curious, where does the lose autoparry and can only dodge come into it, wp doesn't mention that at all, only the combat description...

As you say, it's in the combat description. Not appearing in the W.P. description does not negate what's in the combat description.

That said, think about it from a different angle. You charge into combat, a sword and short sword in your hands. Taking the initiative you do a cross-slash attack with your hands coming down together to cut with both blades in a parallel arc (your double strike). You've used your attack and forfeited your automatic parry, because the automatic parry is nothing more than having a weapon or shield at the ready to deal with an incoming attack. By using that weapon to make an attack, you no longer have it at the ready. If you want to parry at that point it's no longer a reflexive action, it's a conscious choice and thus, like dodging, requires an action.

Here's what bothers me about this example - the logic behind your conclusion for why autoparry is lost after a paired weapon strike should also apply to a single weapon strike. I've taken what you wrote above and edited it to illustrate:

That said, think about it from a different angle. You charge into combat, a sword and short sword in your hands hand. Taking the initiative you do a cross-slash attack with your hands hand coming down together to cut with both blades in a parallel the blade in an arc (your double single strike). You've used your attack and forfeited your automatic parry, because the automatic parry is nothing more than having a weapon or shield at the ready to deal with an incoming attack. By using that weapon to make an attack, you no longer have it at the ready. If you want to parry at that point it's no longer a reflexive action, it's a conscious choice and thus, like dodging, requires an action.

I know the rules say that if a combatant is trained in HTH combat then the situation I just created with my edit is false, and that the ability to autoparry is retained when this happens. As I said though, this is to illustrate why I feel that justification for why the autoparry is lost in a paired weapon attack is flawed.

[MADMANMIKE]

Here's what bothers me about this example - the logic behind your conclusion for why autoparry is lost after a paired weapon strike should also apply to a single weapon strike. I've taken what you wrote above and edited it to illustrate:

That said, think about it from a different angle. You charge into combat, a sword and short sword in your hands hand. Taking the initiative you do a cross-slash attack with your hands hand coming down together to cut with both blades in a parallel the blade in an arc (your double single strike). You've used your attack and forfeited your automatic parry, because the automatic parry is nothing more than having a weapon or shield at the ready to deal with an incoming attack. By using that weapon to make an attack, you no longer have it at the ready. If you want to parry at that point it's no longer a reflexive action, it's a conscious choice and thus, like dodging, requires an action.

I know the rules say that if a combatant is trained in HTH combat then the situation I just created with my edit is false, and that the ability to autoparry is retained when this happens. As I said though, this is to illustrate why I feel that justification for why the autoparry is lost in a paired weapon attack is flawed.

Your perspective would be correct if all people were naturally ambidextrous. Since they are not, what you seem to be missing is the level of difficulty involved with using an off-hand for multiple tasks. Choosing to use your offhand for a simultaneous strike is choosing to make uniform movements with both hands, a task that requires less effort than setting your mind towards using that hand for a trained activity in defense, but deciding to switch between said actions is liking trying to maintain 60mph in a car while changing direction 180 degrees. The brain just doesn't work that way.

If you're only holding one weapon, your mind can adapt to what actions you want it to do much faster than if you are splitting your concentration between two hands.

And while ambidexterity is mentioned in Heroes Unlimited and RIFTS: Lone Star, there is no rule for it in Palladium Fantasy. I would house rule that any character with natural ambidexterity would be able to keep their automatic parry in that situation, but that would be my house rule.

[Tor]

You lose automatic parry however, so from that point on until initiative is rolled again it will cost an action to parry.

As Alrik mentioned, the loss of automatic parry is only until your next action, not for the rest of the round.

My hero runs up and attacks the opponent bearing sword and shield. I make the attack and then my opponent parries. During his action, my opponent strikes me; I parry with the shield. Can I now also strike simulateously?

If you have Paired WP and your next action free, then yes.

If you are out of attacks, or had just used up 2 attacks (like via spellcasting or doing a power punch) then you would not be able to.

My hero runs up and attacks the opponent, both bearing sword and shield. I make the attack and then my opponent parries... can he also simultaneously strike?

If he has the paired WP skill and his next action free, then yes, as above. WP shield alone would not suffice though.

when you parry and strike vs your opponent simultaneously, it doesn't say it uses your next action.

I think it reasonable that unless it says 'from the total' or 'from the end' that we default to perceiving it as next. Consider that other defensive acts like an Entangle will use the next action. It is reasonable to think, even lacking the adjective, that it is the next one.

This is why having initiative is so important for paired weapon users.

Not especially, if you lose initiative and know your opponent uses paired weapons, you can simply go on the defensive and wait for them to attack you.

you do a cross-slash attack with your hands coming down together to cut with both blades in a parallel arc (your double strike).
You've used your attack and forfeited your automatic parry, because the automatic parry is nothing more than having a weapon or shield at the ready to deal with an incoming attack.

I think it might be more complicated than this...

For example in Wormwood we have the defensive monks who can do a leg-parry.

Or you could have folks like a cyborg or a necromancer who tack on a third limb.

This being a PF thread I'll stick with the '3rd limb holding a shield' necro objection.

Yet I don't think this would put those three on the level of the Xiticix who have the limb/brain/antenna combo that allows retaining a parry during twin strikes.

[kiralon]

Well I was sort of responding to you because

..still waiting with baited breath for the explanation..

Lol, not sure where the rest of my statement went but it went something like

I was just saying that the book specifically picks out twin strike as making you lose autoparry and making you dodge, rather than any usage of paired (say twin parries or a parry strike), and the book says you cant parry your opponents next attack, so even if you have 5 attacks a round and he has 3, even if you twin struck him on his last attack, the next time he attacks you next roubd, you cant parry.

and I disagree with only losing autoparry until next action, but as it doesn't say either way (a bastard dm could say lose autoparry until combat is over, or until next year) the advantage it gives would mean everyone would take it and 2 handed weapons would be much rarer and a paired weapons user would always win on average rolls because he gets to parry and his opponent doesn't and on average there is only 1d6 damage difference per blow, but also because that's the way it was in first ed as well, and first ed wasn't as ambiguous.

[Tor]

I think we ought to read page 46's description more closely.

It says "means losing the automatic parry". Parry is not plural. So it refers to a single parry, which logically means the next one.

It also says "leaves the character open to his opponent's next attack". Attack is not plural. So you're only open to the NEXT attack, not multiple upcoming attacks.

If fighting someone with a gun (not too common in PF, albeit) where you might want to spend an action to dodge them anyway, there's not any big loss in doing twin strikes.

Debate might also rage about how automatic dodge functions with this. Whether the 'uses up a melee action' handicaps it, or if that refers to standard dodging and autoDs remain automatic.

[kiralon]

I think we ought to read page 46's description more closely.

It says "means losing the automatic parry". Parry is not plural. So it refers to a single parry, which logically means the next one.

It also says "leaves the character open to his opponent's next attack". Attack is not plural. So you're only open to the NEXT attack, not multiple upcoming attacks.

If fighting someone with a gun (not too common in PF, albeit) where you might want to spend an action to dodge them anyway, there's not any big loss in doing twin strikes.

Debate might also rage about how automatic dodge functions with this. Whether the 'uses up a melee action' handicaps it, or if that refers to standard dodging and autoDs remain automatic.

But as its also the name of the specific skill you are losing its meaning can also mean just that item and plural isn't required.
i.e.
if I said your mage lost fireball would you assume that he lost one casting of fireball, or that he rubs fireball of his sheet.


and the thing with the attacks I was just saying the next time that specific person (that you double struck) attacks you cant parry even if you have 5 attacks afterwards and a new round starts and you win initiative, his next attack can't be parried as you are still open to his next attack.

but the thing that Im mostly interested with this is how many people think that not just twin strikes makes you lose autoparry, but parry/attack and twin parry as well.

and with autododge I have always assumed that if its something that can be dodged then autododge will work as well.

[Alrik Vas]

Rounds in this game have never made sense to me from a logical standpoint, that's why I just use Palladium Sense and get on with it.

Oh, an auto parry is essentially parrying as a free action, so it happens more or less in the span of your attack? Sounds like paired weapons function of parry/attack to me...but for sooth, nay, 'tis not! So when you're double slamming someone and on their action they attack you back, suddenly you can't auto parry because...what...you could auto parry when you had just one weapon attacking, you could even use that weapon to parry the enemy's attack...so...

oh, right. Palladium Sense. Let's apply situational, real life-ish explanations to the rules to suit our circumstantial needs.

[kiralon]

Its not realistic but it is game balancing, otherwise everyone would take wp paired for the doubling of attacks. The way paired works isn't realistic either though as wp paired also makes everyone ambidextrous and just as strong in their off hand as they are in their main hand. That's some serious training.

[Tor]

as its also the name of the specific skill you are losing its meaning can also mean just that item and plural isn't required.
i.e.
if I said your mage lost fireball would you assume that he lost one casting of fireball, or that he rubs fireball of his sheet.

Can you use an example from the books? This fireball thing doesn't mesh with me.

the next time that specific person (that you double struck) attacks you cant parry even if you have 5 attacks afterwards and a new round starts and you win initiative, his next attack can't be parried as you are still open to his next attack.

Reading it literally, yes.

In fact, if I do a twin strike against Splynncryth, he doesn't immediately counter-attack and I flee, and then I go on a 2-decade vacation to Pleasure World, and then come back to Atlantis and he tries to tentacle-punch me, I can't automatically parry him, because that's his next attack.

Seeing the absurdity inherent in the literal reading, I think we ought to determine it to mean something like "the next strike made against you, if one is made in the following turn".

people think that not just twin strikes makes you lose autoparry, but parry/attack and twin parry as well.

Since parry/attack uses an attack and a non-automatic parry uses an attack, whether or not you lose automatic parry doesn't really affect the cost of a parry/strike combo.

I don't even know what twin parry is supposed to do. Changes in PF2 gave some sense regarding parrying 2 hits from the SAME opponent... namely that if you twin strike, an opponent needs paired WP to parry both, otherwise they can only parry one. This change does not exist in all other systems. For example in Xiticix Invasion if they do a 4x sword attack, I can block them all with a single stick, for some reason.

But the bit about parrying 2 different opponents with paired WP... I can't figure how that functions into the gaming system at all.

You can already auto-parry 3 attackers, after all. The 4th apparently is assumed to move their way to your rear and get a free undefended strike. The 3-limit I think should only apply to close-range though. It's feasible for 4 archers to line up in front of you and all shoot their arrows at you, after all.

The 2parry vs. 3parry thing is I think why some view it possibly as a handicap rather than enhancement, even though the tone of presentation implies enhancement to me, although in what way vs. multiple enemies I do not know.

and with autododge I have always assumed that if its something that can be dodged then autododge will work as well.

You can auto-dodge after doing a twin strike, but since auto-dodges are dodges and it says dodging will take an action... we're left to wonder if they are summarizing standard dodging or potentially penalizing auto-dodges.