Besalisks, General grievous, and others can wield multiple weapons with upto four hands. Are there rules for wielding more than two weapons at once?

My Droid player has asked if he can get another set of arms fitted somehow so he can use two rifles.

No such rules, and frankly they're really not needed unless you've got a power-gaming munchkin.

A common house-rule suggestion I've seen however is to use the existing rules or attacking with two weapons, with each weapon after the second increasing the difficulty an additional time and needing an extra 2 advantage to have those weapons hit. So for Grevious attacking with 4 lightsabers, he'd be rolling against a base difficulty of 5 purple (2 base for a melee attack, +3 for the 3 additional lightsabers), and would need a grand total of 6 advantage to hit will all 4 of them.

Truthfully, it's probably something best left to being a descriptive effect but otherwise just using the standard two-weapon combat rules.

Alternately, going Ataru and using Saber Swarm to represent the multiple strikes. But overall I agree that using the standard two-weapon combat rules and using the narrative description of using all arms is likely the best route.

Having 4 hands gives you your second maneuver for free, that could be narrated as using the "Aim" maneuver much easier so gaining up to 2 boost dice for no strain cost due to holding both Lightsabers double handed.

Another possibility is to have 2 training and 2 basic Lightsabers, so you can switch from stun to regular damage without any effort required.

Try to find a way within the rules to make it a Narratively cool, mind you if they have 4 Sabres then they have done a heck of a lot of adventuring (or have a lot of practice making training Sabres!)

As someone who really abhors power gaming, and someone who has witnessed powergaming in this system, which is NOT D&D, I would encourage you to tell your droid player that they cannot get an extra pair of limbs since that would require extensive modification to the droid chassis and reprogramming to allow the droid to use 4 limbs....and it's power gaming. This is not Dungeons and Dragons, this is not Pathfinder, this is not Shadowrun, this is Star Wars, and supposed to focus on the narrative, not "winning" the game.

There are many people who come into this game with the mentality of 'loot everything!' and 'must be allll powerful'. I've attempted to hammer that out of them to day one, some have taken it on board, some haven't.

As someone who really abhors power gaming, and someone who has witnessed powergaming in this system, which is NOT D&D, I would encourage you to tell your droid player that they cannot get an extra pair of limbs since that would require extensive modification to the droid chassis and reprogramming to allow the droid to use 4 limbs....and it's power gaming. This is not Dungeons and Dragons, this is not Pathfinder, this is not Shadowrun, this is Star Wars, and supposed to focus on the narrative, not "winning" the game.

There are many people who come into this game with the mentality of 'loot everything!' and 'must be allll powerful'. I've attempted to hammer that out of them to day one, some have taken it on board, some haven't.

You seem to forget that star wars canon has a character that can fight with four armed arms aka general Grievious, so yes it is star wars even if we find that silly. The player probably just want to replicate what he has seen in the movies or the cartoon.

As for how to handle the fight, I will follow the two-weapon fighting rule and consider the attack linken 3.

As someone who really abhors power gaming, and someone who has witnessed powergaming in this system, which is NOT D&D, I would encourage you to tell your droid player that they cannot get an extra pair of limbs since that would require extensive modification to the droid chassis and reprogramming to allow the droid to use 4 limbs....and it's power gaming. This is not Dungeons and Dragons, this is not Pathfinder, this is not Shadowrun, this is Star Wars, and supposed to focus on the narrative, not "winning" the game.

There are many people who come into this game with the mentality of 'loot everything!' and 'must be allll powerful'. I've attempted to hammer that out of them to day one, some have taken it on board, some haven't.

In regards to power-gaming "not wanted" in star wars I think that's your personal view rather the intention of the gaming system.

You forget that power gaming is a Player mentality not something that is in the rules that you can amend as you see fit.

If a player wants to be "All Powerful" then the likely hood of that player falling to the darkside is more likely and amazingly fun to watch unfold.

Instead of trying to "hammer out" that attitude, try embracing it. See where it takes you, that character, in certain situations is going to cause issues withn the game that will have consequences for the group. This is a great opportunity to rp the resulting issues.

Someone proposed a solution here in a previous thread. Yes the character may wield 4 sabers with 4 arms, but you can't attack with more then 2, using the RAW rules, in a given round. It went something like you still have 2 eyeballs and are programmed or have a brain that may only handle so much at a time. If you also had two heads you might be able to do it, but beings with one head and four arms can't. So, carry two pistols, two sabers, then choose each round if you are going to attack with the sabers or the pistols using the 2-weapon fighting rules. You gain the benefit of swapping back and forth without using Maneuvers.

Someone else said it more eloquently here plus added some extra benefit (even more defense with 4 blades?), but you would need to search for it. I tried and failed.

Donovan hits the mail on the head, in my opinion.

Jut to be sure you have the reference, Xexto stated in Stay on Target, who have 4 arms.

Having 4 hands gives you your second maneuver for free, that could be narrated as using the "Aim" maneuver much easier so gaining up to 2 boost dice for no strain cost due to holding both Lightsabers double handed.

Another possibility is to have 2 training and 2 basic Lightsabers, so you can switch from stun to regular damage without any effort required.

Try to find a way within the rules to make it a Narratively cool, mind you if they have 4 Sabres then they have done a heck of a lot of adventuring (or have a lot of practice making training Sabres!)

Having 4 hands gives a XEXTO an second maneuver for free. Doesn't mean every 4 armed race get's the free maneuver. For instance, there's a Besalik NPC in the Force and Destiny adversary chapter that has no such benefit. They get a free Boost to Brawl checks and can spend 2 Advantage on a melee hit to hit a second character within engaged range. 90% certain that will be what they get when we see them in Special Modifications.

For 4 Weapons (one in each hand)

Two Weapon Combat for a weapon in two different hands.

Use Linked 1 for each side. That only works if all 4 weapons are the same. Could say Top Hands are Linked, Bottom are Linked, or Right are Linked, Left are Linked. Should really still apply the "All Attacks can only have One Target", otherwise it starts to devalue certain Talents.

For 2 Rifles, just use the Two Weapon Combat rules.

For 4 Weapons (one in each hand)

Two Weapon Combat for a weapon in two different hands.

Use Linked 1 for each side. That only works if all 4 weapons are the same. Could say Top Hands are Linked, Bottom are Linked, or Right are Linked, Left are Linked. Should really still apply the "All Attacks can only have One Target", otherwise it starts to devalue certain Talents.

For 2 Rifles, just use the Two Weapon Combat rules.

That's incredibly dangerous territory there. I wouldn't have it be linked because, unlike vehicle mounted (and calibrated) weaponry there's no guarantee that 4 pistols could all be aimed perfectly at the same target. Plus linked is WAY too easy to trigger, while Autofire and Two Weapon attacks at least increase the difficulty of the attack by one. Also, think how hard it is for someone to try to just use two pistols (or swords or knives). Unless their mental bandwidth and hands-to-eye coordination are super-human, that's asking quite a lot for a quad-limbed species to utilize all at once.

When this question came up on the show, we simply said that holding 4 weapons gave you more options, not more attacks. You could dual-wield two two handed weapons, or a two handed weapon and two one handed weapons, or 4 one handed weapons, but you could still only attack with 2 of them on your action, at most.

Like Dono said, adding a difficulty die for each additional weapon you wanted to use might be balanced enough to allow.

For 4 Weapons (one in each hand)

Two Weapon Combat for a weapon in two different hands.

Use Linked 1 for each side. That only works if all 4 weapons are the same. Could say Top Hands are Linked, Bottom are Linked, or Right are Linked, Left are Linked. Should really still apply the "All Attacks can only have One Target", otherwise it starts to devalue certain Talents.

For 2 Rifles, just use the Two Weapon Combat rules.

That's incredibly dangerous territory there. I wouldn't have it be linked because, unlike vehicle mounted (and calibrated) weaponry there's no guarantee that 4 pistols could all be aimed perfectly at the same target. Plus linked is WAY too easy to trigger, while Autofire and Two Weapon attacks at least increase the difficulty of the attack by one. Also, think how hard it is for someone to try to just use two pistols (or swords or knives). Unless their mental bandwidth and hands-to-eye coordination are super-human, that's asking quite a lot for a quad-limbed species to utilize all at once.

When this question came up on the show, we simply said that holding 4 weapons gave you more options, not more attacks. You could dual-wield two two handed weapons, or a two handed weapon and two one handed weapons, or 4 one handed weapons, but you could still only attack with 2 of them on your action, at most.

Like Dono said, adding a difficulty die for each additional weapon you wanted to use might be balanced enough to allow.

I had been thinking this until I realised that these species have evolved with 4 arms. Just like an octopus can use 8 arms individually these species will have capabilities we simply don't have at all.

Having 4 hands gives you your second maneuver for free, that could be narrated as using the "Aim" maneuver much easier so gaining up to 2 boost dice for no strain cost due to holding both Lightsabers double handed.

Another possibility is to have 2 training and 2 basic Lightsabers, so you can switch from stun to regular damage without any effort required.

Try to find a way within the rules to make it a Narratively cool, mind you if they have 4 Sabres then they have done a heck of a lot of adventuring (or have a lot of practice making training Sabres!)

Having 4 hands gives a XEXTO an second maneuver for free. Doesn't mean every 4 armed race get's the free maneuver. For instance, there's a Besalik NPC in the Force and Destiny adversary chapter that has no such benefit. They get a free Boost to Brawl checks and can spend 2 Advantage on a melee hit to hit a second character within engaged range. 90% certain that will be what they get when we see them in Special Modifications.

Having 4 hands gives you your second maneuver for free, that could be narrated as using the "Aim" maneuver much easier so gaining up to 2 boost dice for no strain cost due to holding both Lightsabers double handed.

Another possibility is to have 2 training and 2 basic Lightsabers, so you can switch from stun to regular damage without any effort required.

Try to find a way within the rules to make it a Narratively cool, mind you if they have 4 Sabres then they have done a heck of a lot of adventuring (or have a lot of practice making training Sabres!)

Having 4 hands gives a XEXTO an second maneuver for free. Doesn't mean every 4 armed race get's the free maneuver. For instance, there's a Besalik NPC in the Force and Destiny adversary chapter that has no such benefit. They get a free Boost to Brawl checks and can spend 2 Advantage on a melee hit to hit a second character within engaged range. 90% certain that will be what they get when we see them in Special Modifications.

Ok, awesome thanks, I had actually missed that. Now in that it says melee without a capital which means any Brawn, Melee and Lightsaber check! So they basically add Linked 1 to any hand to hand check (except it can hit any engaged target!). So a dual wield Besalik could, for 4 advantage, hit 3 times in a single attack... Hmmm that's powerful! There starting XP is going to be low low low. The boost to Brawl checks is cool too, I can see a Brawling Force Using Besalsk in my GMing future.

I'm betting they start with 80 xp or so.

Imagine a Besalik warrior with Shii-Cho Knight and Aggressor.

Oh wait, we don't have to...

For 4 Weapons (one in each hand)

Two Weapon Combat for a weapon in two different hands.

Use Linked 1 for each side. That only works if all 4 weapons are the same. Could say Top Hands are Linked, Bottom are Linked, or Right are Linked, Left are Linked. Should really still apply the "All Attacks can only have One Target", otherwise it starts to devalue certain Talents.

For 2 Rifles, just use the Two Weapon Combat rules.

That's incredibly dangerous territory there. I wouldn't have it be linked because, unlike vehicle mounted (and calibrated) weaponry there's no guarantee that 4 pistols could all be aimed perfectly at the same target. Plus linked is WAY too easy to trigger, while Autofire and Two Weapon attacks at least increase the difficulty of the attack by one. Also, think how hard it is for someone to try to just use two pistols (or swords or knives). Unless their mental bandwidth and hands-to-eye coordination are super-human, that's asking quite a lot for a quad-limbed species to utilize all at once.

When this question came up on the show, we simply said that holding 4 weapons gave you more options, not more attacks. You could dual-wield two two handed weapons, or a two handed weapon and two one handed weapons, or 4 one handed weapons, but you could still only attack with 2 of them on your action, at most.

Like Dono said, adding a difficulty die for each additional weapon you wanted to use might be balanced enough to allow.

It's actually not all that bad. It has to be directed at a single target. Yes, it can be seriously damaging. But it's not outside the realm that a competent Auto-Fire blaster can. Besides, you'd have to have a total of 5 or 6 Advantage (depending on Paired Weapons) to activate all 4 weapons, which the most deadly will be a Lightsaber. If someone is getting 5-6 Advantage after all the cancellations, why shouldn't this be allowed?

And while the rules state that you are allowed 1 Action (attack), there are additional rules like Two Weapon Combat and Auto-Fire (and a hit on the Crit Chart) that allows for additional attacks essentially. Auto-fire allows those to spread against multiple targets. Two Weapon Combat limits it to a Single Target. This idea of Four Arm Attacks would easily fall inside the realm of Two Weapon Combat. I could see an Additional Difficulty, but not 1 per arm after the first. I could easily see Setback dice also tossed in.

I think the idea of 'Power Gaming' tends to get in the way of a good idea. Can it be powerful? Yes. But we should also look at where this kind of action will happen with greater success, which would be around 3-4 Yellow dice pools against a 2 Purple. And don't get me wrong, I am saying to do this, you use the Two Weapon Combat rule of adding difficulty for the attack as well. So +1 Purple on top of Range Difficulty plus Defense, that's not going to slide easily in favor of the player unless they are close and attack weak targets.

Having 4 hands gives you your second maneuver for free, that could be narrated as using the "Aim" maneuver much easier so gaining up to 2 boost dice for no strain cost due to holding both Lightsabers double handed.

Another possibility is to have 2 training and 2 basic Lightsabers, so you can switch from stun to regular damage without any effort required.

Try to find a way within the rules to make it a Narratively cool, mind you if they have 4 Sabres then they have done a heck of a lot of adventuring (or have a lot of practice making training Sabres!)

Having 4 hands gives a XEXTO an second maneuver for free. Doesn't mean every 4 armed race get's the free maneuver. For instance, there's a Besalik NPC in the Force and Destiny adversary chapter that has no such benefit. They get a free Boost to Brawl checks and can spend 2 Advantage on a melee hit to hit a second character within engaged range. 90% certain that will be what they get when we see them in Special Modifications.

Ok, awesome thanks, I had actually missed that. Now in that it says melee without a capital which means any Brawn, Melee and Lightsaber check! So they basically add Linked 1 to any hand to hand check (except it can hit any engaged target!). So a dual wield Besalik could, for 4 advantage, hit 3 times in a single attack... Hmmm that's powerful! There starting XP is going to be low low low. The boost to Brawl checks is cool too, I can see a Brawling Force Using Besalsk in my GMing future.

I'm betting they start with 80 xp or so.

Imagine a Besalik warrior with Shii-Cho Knight and Aggressor.

Oh wait, we don't have to...

That's Terrifying...

As someone who really abhors power gaming, and someone who has witnessed powergaming in this system, which is NOT D&D, I would encourage you to tell your droid player that they cannot get an extra pair of limbs since that would require extensive modification to the droid chassis and reprogramming to allow the droid to use 4 limbs....and it's power gaming. This is not Dungeons and Dragons, this is not Pathfinder, this is not Shadowrun, this is Star Wars, and supposed to focus on the narrative, not "winning" the game.

There are many people who come into this game with the mentality of 'loot everything!' and 'must be allll powerful'. I've attempted to hammer that out of them to day one, some have taken it on board, some haven't.

In regards to power-gaming "not wanted" in star wars I think that's your personal view rather the intention of the gaming system.

You forget that power gaming is a Player mentality not something that is in the rules that you can amend as you see fit.

If a player wants to be "All Powerful" then the likely hood of that player falling to the darkside is more likely and amazingly fun to watch unfold.

Instead of trying to "hammer out" that attitude, try embracing it. See where it takes you, that character, in certain situations is going to cause issues withn the game that will have consequences for the group. This is a great opportunity to rp the resulting issues.

I counter that the idea of quad wielding was something that was probably not intended when the game was released, dual wield sure, but quad wield? Or the ability to wield two blaster rifles? To me the idea really does not sit well with me.

Yes it is a player mentality, but a powergamer player will use the rules to get the biggest advantage they can for no reason other than " jus' 'cause" or to 'win' when that is not the objective of the game.

Your dark side comment is relative to a Force campaign, but what about those out there who are running Age or Edge campaigns who can't give those penalties for? Or have those players fall down to the dark side because they are not force sensitive. I have seen what autofire can do on a Heavy Repeating Blaster, being able to one shot a nemesis level enemy, should not happen or be able to happen. I am all for embracing characterful moments, but not when someone brings the attitude of 'I must win the game' to the table.

Why am I not backing down? Because it is this very issue that nearly made me quit GMing this game...sure my players were having tons of fun, while I was not, I was stressed, I could not challenge them, and the game each week became something I actively didn't look forward to. As a GM who is very inexperienced, that caused doubt in myself on whether I should be even doing this, and when something causes that kind of issue...there is a problem.

I will not back down from my stance, yes Grevious was there, yes there was Pong Krell...but they are very exceptional circumstances. Anakin dual wielded lightsabers for perhaps 30 seconds in episode, it didn't suddenly become something he did all the time, only because circumstances gave him that momentary edge. That I would allow, small contained instances of awesome, not a permanent thing.

I have a player who dual wields pistols in one of my groups, that is perfectly fine, pistols have a low threshold of damage, so having two of them can put you on par with a rifle, I don't think the system was intended for dual wielding rifles, or other two handed weapons. I mean where does it stop? Does the droid then get another two arms? and then another two?

Rules wise, if your going to do it, +1 difficulty for each held weapon and at least 2 advantage to fire per gun, so to fire and hit all 4 would require success, advantage, advantage, advantage, advantage, advantage, advantage.

Alternative, if I were to do it, I would simply follow my best judgement; for pistols I'd do standard dual wielding with a boost die to represent the extra blasters so they may do a bit extra than if they just had two, mechanically they are firing two pistols, but narratively they are using 4. For your blaster rifle scenario...one blaster rifle with an upgrade?

As someone who really abhors power gaming, and someone who has witnessed powergaming in this system, which is NOT D&D, I would encourage you to tell your droid player that they cannot get an extra pair of limbs since that would require extensive modification to the droid chassis and reprogramming to allow the droid to use 4 limbs....and it's power gaming. This is not Dungeons and Dragons, this is not Pathfinder, this is not Shadowrun, this is Star Wars, and supposed to focus on the narrative, not "winning" the game.

There are many people who come into this game with the mentality of 'loot everything!' and 'must be allll powerful'. I've attempted to hammer that out of them to day one, some have taken it on board, some haven't.

In regards to power-gaming "not wanted" in star wars I think that's your personal view rather the intention of the gaming system.

You forget that power gaming is a Player mentality not something that is in the rules that you can amend as you see fit.

If a player wants to be "All Powerful" then the likely hood of that player falling to the darkside is more likely and amazingly fun to watch unfold.

Instead of trying to "hammer out" that attitude, try embracing it. See where it takes you, that character, in certain situations is going to cause issues withn the game that will have consequences for the group. This is a great opportunity to rp the resulting issues.

I counter that the idea of quad wielding was something that was probably not intended when the game was released, dual wield sure, but quad wield? Or the ability to wield two blaster rifles? To me the idea really does not sit well with me.

Yes it is a player mentality, but a powergamer player will use the rules to get the biggest advantage they can for no reason other than " jus' 'cause" or to 'win' when that is not the objective of the game.

Your dark side comment is relative to a Force campaign, but what about those out there who are running Age or Edge campaigns who can't give those penalties for? Or have those players fall down to the dark side because they are not force sensitive. I have seen what autofire can do on a Heavy Repeating Blaster, being able to one shot a nemesis level enemy, should not happen or be able to happen. I am all for embracing characterful moments, but not when someone brings the attitude of 'I must win the game' to the table.

Why am I not backing down? Because it is this very issue that nearly made me quit GMing this game...sure my players were having tons of fun, while I was not, I was stressed, I could not challenge them, and the game each week became something I actively didn't look forward to. As a GM who is very inexperienced, that caused doubt in myself on whether I should be even doing this, and when something causes that kind of issue...there is a problem.

I will not back down from my stance, yes Grevious was there, yes there was Pong Krell...but they are very exceptional circumstances. Anakin dual wielded lightsabers for perhaps 30 seconds in episode, it didn't suddenly become something he did all the time, only because circumstances gave him that momentary edge. That I would allow, small contained instances of awesome, not a permanent thing.

I have a player who dual wields pistols in one of my groups, that is perfectly fine, pistols have a low threshold of damage, so having two of them can put you on par with a rifle, I don't think the system was intended for dual wielding rifles, or other two handed weapons. I mean where does it stop? Does the droid then get another two arms? and then another two?

Rules wise, if your going to do it, +1 difficulty for each held weapon and at least 2 advantage to fire per gun, so to fire and hit all 4 would require success, advantage, advantage, advantage, advantage, advantage, advantage.

Alternative, if I were to do it, I would simply follow my best judgement; for pistols I'd do standard dual wielding with a boost die to represent the extra blasters so they may do a bit extra than if they just had two, mechanically they are firing two pistols, but narratively they are using 4. For your blaster rifle scenario...one blaster rifle with an upgrade?

What makes you believe you can't challenge them? If the HRB is becoming too "powerful" then break it, have it stolen, outlawed on worlds they travel to, have elite bounty hunters ambush the group so they all go first and stun the party and strip them of all their gear.

There are plenty of ways to deal with powergamers, if they want to manipulate the rules to their advantage then you do the same, make it really tough for them to operate. An earlier post mentioned, high society functions places were you can't walk around with rifles and vibro-axes.

I know the Player who is wielding the HBR and yes, I agree with you I believe he did it for the wrong reasons but plenty of other dm's will be in the same boat, how are they dealing with it?

but then your making it the player VS the GM, and that's not the intention of this system, nor should it be any system. The players work together with the GM to create the adventure and the narrative, plus raining on that players fun is a little unfair. The situation has been solved with the HRB...but just making it clear that it is very easy to get yourself into a mess and not find a way out of it or find yourself suddenly not enjoying the game as much as your players are.

If the player is as powerful as you say that it is practically "breaking" the game then I would say it is within reason to do something about it directly.

Star Wars is meant to be epic Science Fiction Fantasy. A player with a Jury Rigged HBR is only a problem if you make it one.

Obviously he can't carry it around with him all the time. Its your job as a GM to make sure that everyone is having fun. Less worry about his toy and more worry about the rest of the players. He wants to be Arnold in Commando so let him mow down minions with impunity. Watch Serenity you might learn how everyone in an episode has a job to do. Jayne's job is primarily to kill the opposition. Mal's job is to talk, Wash's job is to fly the ship, the doc's job is to patch everyone up and River's job is well to be crazy unpredictable.

RPGs are exactly the same each player has something they are really good at and its your job as a GM to give them something to do that lets them shine at it.

If you're going to build encounters that restrict or prevent a player from doing their shtick they need to trust you that later on they will really get to shine.

In the example of being captured by Bounty Hunters and having their equipment confiscated, the player will expect a chance to bring vengeance upon those Bounty Hunters in their favourite method. That may be by AutoFire, or Fire Sale of their assets, it may just be convincing slavers that their ship is a good target... But the players need that chance and need to TRUST you that your going to let them have their fun.

Im actually building a 4 armed Gank that uses 2 cybernetic arms with a cybernetic brain implant that allows the use of them. Also retinal tracker and a cybernetic eye to help with coordination, for RP purposes, so this thread has been very helpful.