I guess it depends. I'm speaking based on the perspective of my Blood Angels Assault Marine, who ALWAYS has his Executioner Axe out. Signature Wargear (Master) gives it Master Crafted, +20 to WS and +2 Damage Total. He's always got it out whether he's holding it one handed like a halberd in social situations or two handed to wield it.

With a weapon like that, it's not like I'll be less intimidating if I put it away. I could see it being an issue for different characters in different circumstances, especially those for whom Melee Weapons are not the one and only choice.

A bit of threado'mancy here but I've been thinking.

I think one of the issues with two handed weapons is that they loose out on magnitude damage, against others the less attacks but higher damage is more even.

And if Dynasty warriors has taught me anything it's that bigger weapons work better against hordes.

What if two handed melee weapons had +2 magnitude damage per hit (dependant on weapon size, a Long Sabre or Claymore might be +1, a Halbard might be +3).

Some one who's done a lot a more DW horde fighting than me can tell me how this looks compared to normal weapon mag damage.

IMO the unwieldy thing was not well done, u get 2 defenses/round + 1 dodge with high-end talent + 1 parry with another high-end talent... for low-lvl beeing reduced to 1 defense is not good but for a high-lvl beeing reduced to 2 instead of 4...

You have 3 talents that make parrying great, Counterattack and Wall of something ( Extra parry ) and stalwart defense, those 3 will make all the diference, between a weapon that can parry and a weapon that can't.

If they can't parry then they suck, unless Felling() is tottaly necessary... which it probably won't be...

If you want 2-handers to be used then they need a clear tradeoff on 1 extra attack and option to parry.

Nothing here applies to 1-handers as they have the built-in option of using an off-hand parrying one, aka Thunder-Hammer + Shield.

Isidro

At Last Forgot said:

I actually think two-weapon wielder was originally mainly intended for gunslingers while melee characters were meant to concentrate on Swift and Lightning attack.

While I do think Unwieldy is extreme, it isn't counterintuitive when you think of the tropes that these weapons fall into in 40k. Double handed weapons in 40k (and Warhammer) are not historical two handed weapons, they are stereotyped two-handed weapons, ie slow, heavy, unsophisticated, but extremely damaging. They are normally wielded in exaggerated swings aimed to batter through a target's defences by brute force, rather than the historical two hander which is actually a very precise weapon. With this trope in mind I would say just reduce it to Unbalanced, rather than Unwieldy (as it is just extreme).

Two defences a round? Where does that come from? I am fairly sure that if you don't have Step Aside or Wall of Steel you just have one defence a round.

borithan said:

This is a really good point. A large weapon by 40k (and especially Marine) standards is a very, very large weapon indeed. One Storm Warden illustration in the book is carrying a Sacris claymore as long as he is tall. That's an eight-foot sword, with a blade much broader and thicker than it needs to be.

The big-and-slow trope is historically inaccurate, but it's what the game designers were thinking of when they made the weapons. I don't think it's appropriate to start bringing a historical analysis of Western martial arts into a space fantasy setting.

It's also worth noting that the only Unwieldy weapon in the main rulebook is a power fist, which I think is justified to better represent the TT (where it strikes last in melee combat). The relic blade, which a lot of two-hander people will be aiming for at higher power levels, doesn't even have Unbalanced.

The real conundrum is the RoB executioner and power claymore, which got Unwieldy for some reason I can't really fathom (especially considering that the Sacris claymore only has Unbalanced). To me Unwieldy seems like something you should apply to an object that isn't even a very well-designed weapon, like the breaching shears. It's a pretty hefty penalty to take up in exchange for Devastating (1) (though now that I've read this thread, I'm thinking they gave the claymore Devastating to make up for the general disadvantage two-handers have against Hordes versus two-weapon wielders. It's funny to see designers apparently reacting to fan complaints only to invite more complaints.)

Anyway, I'd houserule the RoB two-handers as Unbalanced just for pity's sake.

one of the things i did for big two handed weapons in runequest years ago was give them a bonus on the hit location so a 2 handed weapon is more likely to hit upper body and chest.

I know that in D+D a two handed weapon user gets a bigger bonus for using cleave so maybe the option/ skill to make a more powerful single attack rather than several attacks , space to wield such big weapons should be a consideration, especially if a player really fluffs their roll

"whoops your marine misses the guant with his thunder hammer , striking the side of the wall you now have your weapon wedged in the remains of the wall " lol

a fight on a fragile rope bridge suddenly becomes more risky too

One thing you always must account for is, you can't fight with an Eviscirator/Power Longsword the way I or any of my training partners fight. It would be completly insane to grab the blade of your power weapon for more control. For the Saceris Claymores, well yes even if the sharp part (upper third of the blade) is mono, one can fight normally with it. So Balanced for them, at least no penalty/Bonus at all, is applicable. Axes/Maces/Hammers, on the other hand, are heavy headed and akward to parry with. So Unwieldy/unbalanced is appropiate. Swords are better balanced due to theire nature. So maximum of unbalenced for really unwieldy blades is ok.
Eviscirators... well, with the exception of Chaptermaster Seths Eviscirator/Chainsword these things are huge Chainsaws. Not balanced at all, and awkward to handle.

btw, Two handed weapons have one big advantage, more and partly much higher damage compared to one handed Weapons. and since you can "only" score one additonal hit while wielding two weapons the advantage of heavy melee weapons is significant enough.

Although I like the idea of Mastery skill to swipe away the parry penalty. Also a Circular Attack (TT codex Grey Knights, part of the special Rule for the Brotherhood Champions. It's translated as "Vollendeter Krieger" aka peerless warrior) is fine. but as i remember their was somthing like that all ready... (Furious Assault does this, beefing it up with an Extra would fit perfectly requiring a two handed weapon.)

Their is of course the option of awarding accomplished duelists with the Master of Blades (Power Sword/Power Claymore) He can than choose, better defence or better offense with either of these weapons as he can swap statistics.
So the system gives us much options for tweaking.

Someone on this thread mentioned Master of Blades from RoB so I read it and it kills the 2-hander warrior.... If you can use a power sword and "switch" stats for the biggest weapon around you don't need to use a 2-hander or lose an extra attack from the 2-weapon wielder. If you have initiative just turn your 2 Power/chain swords into Thunder Hammers/Chain Fists/Eviscerators/Executioner's Axe and attack using all the 1-handed weapon talents.

IMO this discussion must include a change to MASTER OF BLADES.

Isidro

Yes: It switches stats. That means that a powersword becoming a power claymore would need two hands to wield. That's not a problem at all.

was my Quote Isidro =D

and yes you have to switch to ALL charateristics. so use your power knive with two hands as a Power Claymore...
also at least some logic, even if a RPG is involved that as a rule tend to ignore logic for fun and fluff =D

So no Problem i think
I'm jst not statisfied with most Melee weapon rules concerning Swords. Powerfists/Hammers/Axes Staffs and Polearms are rather ok, Some Swords are... just doesn't fell right.
Also yes, twohanded weapons tended to be squishy comared to one handed weapons. but honest: the clyamores have 5! points more damege and more penetration. only the unwieldy is out of place. skip that, givving it neiter advantages nor penalty to parry, and the weapon is good and reliable. even much cheaper than a normal save a pair of Power swords. (15 to 40 req)

so all cool. At least for my littel well working GM world where I am the Emporer; the rinous powers and the Rule lawyer are, in personal union