Can a PC, with no special talents and weilds a pistol in his main hand and a sword in the off hand, attempt to parry? and if so, is there a penalty applied, and for what reason?

Chern

Yes, no penalty, actually a bonus...swords are Balanced

Yes, the PC can attempt to parry a melee attack with the sword, just as Santiago said. But logically this should incur a -20 penalty (in addition to the bonus for balanced) as he is wielding the sword in his off hand .

OK, see that's the confusion in my group.

Had to really hunt down the answer, and its clear as mud

page 197 under Two Weapon Fighting, 4th bullet point

(yadda yadda yadda) .... "This Weapon Skill Test is not an attack, and therefore it does suffer the standard penalty for attacks made using your secondary hand."

First it says it isn't an attack, indicating it shouldn't be treated the same as an attack, and then it goes and says it IS treated the same as attacks.

So, my question is.... HUH?

Some official guidance would be great.

Chernobyl

I'm not sure where the confusion lies.

If you are wielding a melee weapon as one of your two weapons you may parry as a reaction (reaction is defined on pg. 188)

You many not parry more than once a round (this attempts to clarify the question "what if I have equipped two melee weapons") *** I'll add in here "without the appropriate talents"

Parry is a weapon skill test

Even though parry is a weapons skill test it is not an attack and does not suffer from the penalty listed under bullet 2 (-20 WS)

I've actually always assumed that you did NOT receive the -20 for using your off hand and that the word "not" simply got left out of the sentence. After all, the way it's currently worded is clumsy and strait up bizarre -the "therefor" clause makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever by it's current wording. However, if you put a "not" in there, suddenly it's no longer clumsy and not in the least bit bizarre.

This assertion is further backed up when you consider shields. Using a shield gives you a +15 to parry. However, if you have a -20 to parry with your off hand, and unless your Captain America, you're going to be using your shield in your off-hand, why would you ever use a shield to parry at a -5 when you can use your sword to parry at a +10? Even with two weapon wielder, you would still be better off parrying with a sword in your dominant hand as opposed to a shield in your off hand.

Someone just forgo to put a "not" in that sentence.

I'm with the "no penalty" choir here. Parrying is often done by the left hand and users of shields and Main Gauche (parrying daggers meant to use in the off-hand) were seldom ambidextrous.

On the other hand, using a sword for off-hand parry is alot clumsier than you'd expect, especially with a pistol in your main hand. There is a reason why small bucklers or large daggers were preferred, although large shields pretty much compensates for it's bulkiness by more protection.

Come to think of it I'd like the penalty to apply to all non-defensive weapons that is larger than knives (power blades excepted). But that would be a house-rule I think.

The penalty is only for attacking with your off-hand but the bonusses you get for better quality weapons are only for attacking...there is you balance