What are some good ways different systems use to implement dual

>>51678388
dual wielding becomes much more "realistic" in a system that has a viable parry or active defense mechanic. Having an effective one of those gives a reason to use your offhand weapon for something other than just a second attack. I like Savage worlds for this. Active defense is generally not required in that system to avoid getting hit but it is definitely viable.

You could also impose damage penalties to using two weapons and justify it with not being able to put your full force behind each blow, etc, but be prepared for players to hate it.

In my hoomebrew, dual-wielding simply allows an attack from either weapon with the off-hand weapon providing +1 AC to melee attacks. Dual wielding is meant to be defensive.

WFRP gives the most realistic dual wielding mechanic.

File: 1478451640602.gif (1MB, 540x304px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 540x304px

>>51678388
>It shouldn't be as simple as "2x the swords 2x the attacks!"

Why not? In 90% of fictional depictions of dual wielding it's used by the person that values speed over strength, so it makes sense for it to make it easier to attack more at the cost of not having a shield or being able to use both hands on one weapon.

>>51679489
In D&D the combat roll is an abstraction of fighting back and forth for a bit, it's not one swing that takes 6 seconds. So suddenly making it into 2 rolls = 2 attacks breaks that abstraction.

>>51678820
>Being this tier plebean

File: bait HUEG.jpg (224KB, 3000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 3000x3000px

>>51678388
>Don't reply to Lindybait threads
>Don't reply to Lindybait threads
>Don't reply to Lindybait threads
>Don't reply to Lindybait threads

>>51678820
In that it's completely unusable?

Realistic doesn't mean good.

Fuck off you fucking teaaboo, no one likes you anymore.

Legends of the Wulin goes for possibly the simplest approach. 'Paired' is just one of the potential weapon tags, along with Sword, Saber, Spear, Staff, Massive, Flexible and Ranged. Each has its own stat modifications and abilities and up to two tags can be combined, gaining the benefits of each.

It's the most abstract way of doing it beyond it being pure fluff, but it gives paired weapons a decent amount of mechanical identity without overly focusing the system on trying to represent them.

>>51678567
Thats not really how that works senpai

>>51679489
>what are parrying daggers
The benefit of dual wielding is being able to attack and defend with either hand simultaneously, or having two weapons that are good at 2 different things

File: 5998503+_73f4f0eab0c288b7899c4fd3b8f3ad27.jpg (195KB, 795x1212px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 795x1212px

>>51679732

>>51678388
You only get one extra attack from an off-hand in 3.5 I believe
I know that's nitpicking and that means if you only have 1 attack per round normally you still get 2x the attacks, but fighters with only 1 attack per round usually don't have the appropriate feats to make good use of an off-hand attack
It sort of represents getting in a lot of hits with your main-hand and sometimes getting in one with your off-hand.

>>51678388
>3.5/pathfinder/5e do a very good job at it at all.

4e actually does it okay, I think. Two weapons only give you extra attacks in the sense that there are powers that let/require you attack with both, but otherwise it's usually just bonus AC/attack bonus.

But >>51679977 is a pretty good solution. Doesn't gamma world do this as well?

Hell, I quite like DWs dual wielding, as it gives the logical benefit of being able to use both of your weapons tags, but then, tags are way better to differentiate weapons than damage dice anyway.

>>51679624
It doesn't work out this way mechanically. Mechanically, one attack is one swing, with combatants trading blows back and forth. There are ways to write rules for abstracted fighting, and D&D does the exact opposite of that, and always has and always will.