I have an Inquisitor that is going to dual wield lightsabers. Do i just add the 'linked' quality to them?

1 hour ago, oh_grapes said:

I have an Inquisitor that is going to dual wield lightsabers. Do i just add the 'linked' quality to them?

If you go to Additional Combat Modifiers in Chapter VI: Conflict and Combat, you'll find a section on Two-Weapon Combat.

4 minutes ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

If you go to Additional Combat Modifiers in Chapter VI: Conflict and Combat, you'll find a section on Two-Weapon Combat.

Thank you kind sir

Pro-tip @oh_grapes : dual wielding sucks when used to attack.

A dual-bladed saber (Linked) is WAY better for attacking. Same second set of damage, but no increased Difficulty.

The only good way to dual wield is to wield one 'saber outfitted with offensive mods in one hand, and always attack with that.

Then wield a second 'saber in your other hand, NEVER attack with it, and just outfit it with passive defensive mods.

Of course if you are a GM making an inquisitor NPC, you can describe dual lightsabers and mechanically run them with linked. Nobody can stop you and your players probably won’t know the difference as they tear the inquisitor to pieces. Really, it’s no different than giving an NPC a talent without following a talent tree.

If the inquisitor is a PC, you have to play by the rules and use two-weapon combat.

The Paired attachment helps a lot. But they really need a dual weilding melee spec

Shoto lightsaber will give you Accurate 1, Superior Hilt Personalization (grants the Superior quality) will boost damage 1 and add an automatic advantage when using the weapon. Of course, there is always just good ol' skill ranks. 4-5 ranks in Lightsaber and the Inquisitor shouldn't have to worry too much about increased difficulty.

Paired attachment, shoto, Superior, none of that does anything to improve dual wieldling to be as good as the dual-saber, and arguably still worse than a single saber (when you consider the increased Difficulty and that triggering the second saver hit often takes away critting).

It's the increased Difficulty that's the problem. And since you can get those same or similar improvements to the normal saber or dual-blade saber, it makes their net benefit in the situation null.

I played a dual wieldling PC for 700 earned XP. Had a shoto and paired. And I was consistently worse than everyone else at damage dealing, even those with just a single normal saber - usually because I missed or couldn't trigger my saber anyway and did less damage. It just a crap option. UNTIL I figured out that I needed to just stop trying to hit with that second saber and load it up with defense.

That difficulty bump is a significant negative impact, and unsavable when paired with the other detriments. There's just no way to mitigate it to be a net good over or even to be equal with the other damage dealing options.

Instead of ignoring the rules for a mechanic that the PC's must use (which tends to not go over well if/when the PCs realize what you're doing), I would recommend if you really want to have an Inquisitor that dual wields, use the one offense/one defense single saber attack schema as I described, but just give your Inquisitor the Saber Swarm talent so that you're at least adhering to some fair gameplay principles.

He wants the character to have two sabers, didn't specify it had to be better than all other options.

EDIT: In fact, if it's harder for the Inquisitor to hit, that isn't a bad thing for the players.

48 minutes ago, emsquared said:

Paired attachment, shoto, Superior, none of that does anything to improve dual wieldling to be as good as the dual-saber, and arguably still worse than a single saber (when you consider the increased Difficulty and that triggering the second saver hit often takes away critting).

It's the increased Difficulty that's the problem. And since you can get those same or similar improvements to the normal saber or dual-blade saber, it makes their net benefit in the situation null.

I played a dual wieldling PC for 700 earned XP. Had a shoto and paired. And I was consistently worse than everyone else at damage dealing, even those with just a single normal saber - usually because I missed or couldn't trigger my saber anyway and did less damage. It just a crap option. UNTIL I figured out that I needed to just stop trying to hit with that second saber and load it up with defense.

That difficulty bump is a significant negative impact, and unsavable when paired with the other detriments. There's just no way to mitigate it to be a net good over or even to be equal with the other damage dealing options.

Instead of ignoring the rules for a mechanic that the PC's must use (which tends to not go over well if/when the PCs realize what you're doing), I would recommend if you really want to have an Inquisitor that dual wields, use the one offense/one defense single saber attack schema as I described, but just give your Inquisitor the Saber Swarm talent so that you're at least adhering to some fair gameplay principles.

His mistake is in always using dual wielding rules. you can have a saber in each hand and only attack with one most of the time. save the dual wielding for minion groups. also it works better when you get more dice in lightsaber.

3 purple is pretty rough for dual wielding Melee

1 minute ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

3 purple is pretty rough for dual wielding Melee

yes. this is why it requires a lot of skill. kind of like real life...

16 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

His mistake is in always using dual wielding rules. you can have a saber in each hand and only attack with one most of the time. save the dual wielding for minion groups. also it works better when you get more dice in lightsaber.

You're still doing worse than the folks who aren't using a shoto and/or aren't using up previous HP to improve a patently sub-optimal attack option.

In the end I gave the Inquisitor a double-blade lightsaber. Thanks for your help.

Good choice.

If the solution as others are suggesting is "Well, you just need to power game more and it's ok.", that means it's not okay.

Honestly, when you use dual wielding as I have suggested - modding one for offense, and one for defense, and not attacking with the second - wielding two lightsabers is actually incredibly good...

That 700 XP, sub-optimal damage dealer PC I mentioned? When I used that dual-but-not-dual-schema became an incredible tank for the group. In fact never once for knocked unconscious in combat in the course of the entire campaign. And still could dish out damage when needed.

6 minutes ago, emsquared said:

You're still doing worse than the folks who aren't using a shoto and/or aren't using up previous HP to improve a patently sub-optimal attack option.

Not really. you are assuming 2 shotos. I use shoto and standard hilt

2 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Not really. you are assuming 2 shotos. I use shoto and standard hilt

Naw, I'm not assuming anything.

Just doing math.

Increased difficulty and 2 Advantage is a horrible trade-off.

2 minutes ago, emsquared said:

Naw, I'm not assuming anything.

Just doing math.

Increased difficulty and 2 Advantage is a horrible trade-off.

no. paired makes it 1 advantage if you use paired. and 1 more purple is not that big a deal.

Again, you're trading off HP slots, Crits, and base damage for that.

Horrible option.

That's great @Daeglan if you enjoy playing a suboptimal option. You do you.

I just wanted to make the OP aware of what they were doing.

1 minute ago, emsquared said:

Again, you're trading off HP slots, Crits, and base damage for that.

Horrible option.

That's great @Daeglan if you enjoy playing a suboptimal option. You do you.

I just wanted to make the OP aware of what they were doing.

It is not suboptimal.

3 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

It is not suboptimal.

Your inability to back that up with literally anything but your assurance is very convincing.

🤣

7 minutes ago, emsquared said:

Your inability to back that up with literally anything but your assurance is very convincing.

🤣

you claim that it is suboptimal with fairly shoddy reasoning is suboptimal. dual weilding is a tool that is good for certain situations and in no way requires you to use them for every situation. Dont use them for every situation. use them for situation where it is beneficial.

19 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

you claim that it is suboptimal with fairly shoddy reasoning is suboptimal. dual weilding is a tool that is good for certain situations and in no way requires you to use them for every situation. Dont use them for every situation. use them for situation where it is beneficial.

29 minutes ago, emsquared said:

Your inability to back that up with literally anything but your assurance is very convincing.

🤣

this forum was not for arguing please resort to the direct message for that.

28 minutes ago, oh_grapes said:

this forum was not for arguing please resort to the direct message for that.

You'll have to forgive @Daeglan , he's embarrassed that he thought the thing he was doing with his PC was good. He interprets his own embarrassment, or perhaps his inability to see the failing before, or probably both, as a personal weakness. And now that he's realized all that, and he has no way of refuting it, as you can tell, it's driven him temporarily insane. Forcing him to believe that just saying something makes it so.

He'll probably keep on pretending like he's said something substantial, and I'll probably continue to try to goad him into doing the math cuz that's the only way he can refute the preponderance of evidence against his assertion.

If you don't find that sort of exchange humourous, you should probably just not waste your time coming back to this thread.

Just now, emsquared said:

You'll have to forgive @Daeglan , he's embarrassed that he thought the thing he was doing with his PC was good. He interprets his own embarrassment, or perhaps his inability to see the failing before, or probably both, as a personal weakness. And now that he's realized all that, and he has no way of refuting it, as you can tell, it's driven him temporarily insane. Forcing him to believe that just saying something makes it so.

He'll probably keep on pretending like he's said something substantial, and I'll probably continue to try to goad him into doing the math cuz that's the only way he can refute the preponderance of evidence against his assertion.

If you don't find that sort of exchange humourous, you should probably just not waste your time coming back to this thread.

Using a tool wrong doesn't make you smart. It just means you are using a tool wrong.