Hello,

I'm not quite sure if I understand just how defensive weapons (i.e. shields) work. For example, I imagine that a character with axe and shield can use the shield to parry a blow even though their main weapon (the axe) has the unbalanced trait. Presuming that the character does not have the ambidextrous talent, does that mean the parry attempt suffers a penalty for using the "off" hand, even though that's the hand the character has probably trained to use a shield in?

Also, if a character has a shield and a sword (a balanced weapon) does he get both bonuses to the parry attempt, or just the higher?

so firstly for parrying with 2 different weapons, yes, the player does take the penalty with the shield to parry even though he may be used to that side if he lacks the ambidexterous talent, this works the same as if he had a sword in the other hand, it isn't a question of use it is a question of arm strenth, because amibedexterous represents the ability of both hands being equal any character without it lacks the equality between hands, one is just better, and when dual wielding without the ambidexterous talent, the second arm becomes weaker as it doesn't have the same abiltiy. even with the ambidexterous talent it is still a -10 penalty i think though.

now as for the second question, the parrying benefit is much like armor stacking, you simply take the characters higher benefit, which i think is the sword, becuase it is better at parrying it is a nautral lead, and if he fails that parry he may open himself up even though he has a shield,

Looking through the rules and the errata, I've come to a few personal conclusions.

1. Ambidexterity's and Two Weapon Wielder's bonuses should be switched. Right now, Ambidexterity gives a boost to both the off hand AND the primary hand, and TWW boosts the off-hand ONLY.

2. There is nothing indicating to me that PARRY tests count as an attack in the way it is described concerning penalties for off-hand. This, to me, means that parrying is done without penalty, or at most takes the inferred -20 from off-handed use, correctable through Ambidexterity (that is, the existing Two Weapon Wielder talent).

Even in that more stringent scenario, unskilled, you're parrying at a penalty (-20 off-hand, +15 defensive), but not as much of a penalty as with an unbalanced or unwieldy weapon. Not good, but not bad. Skilled in both hands, you're parrying like the turtle you're emulating (+15 to parry).

If you also apply the TWWing penalty, you end up with some oddities... like a trained, ambidexterous TWW with just a sword (+10 from balanced) being better at parrying than that same person with a sword AND a shield (-10 from TWWing, either +10 from balanced or +15 from defensive).

All of this is before shields' other possible benefits, like the common "increases armor on X and Y locations" seen a lot nowadays.

I'm fine with TWWers being more vulnerable on the offense, but I'm not ok with TWWers being more vulnerable even when sword-and-boarding. The damage potential a sword-and-boarder is sacrificing should be rewarded with impressive defensive capabilities.

Parrying is done with your choice of a single weapon thus only that weapon's bonuses are applied.

When parrying an attack with your sword, balanced +10, it would make no sense for it to benefit from the shield's defensive +15 bonus. This is the same rule as attacking, a best quality melee weapon +10 doesn't improve your chance to hit with a common melee weapon in your other hand.

Also, ambidextrous negates the inherent -20 offhand penalty to all actions made with the offhand. Without it your parry with the defensive offhand item is at +15-20= -5 . With the shield and sword combo described without being ambidextrous it would be to your benefit to parry with the balanced sword instead (+10). The shield however could still be useful in mitigating damage though as cover (this really depends on what shield you were using as they all seem to have a slightly different set of rules).

With the ambidextrous talent your character could carry two weapons, and as long as he only uses one to attack in the round suffer no penalties for two-weapon wielding (since you aren't actually using them both at the same time). This method allows one to be ready for ranged and melee attacks, carrying a powersword in one hand and a bolter (with recoil glove or pistol/extra grip weapon mod) in the other.

@usualsuspect

My take on the errata explaination of the talents.

"If you have the Two Weapon Wielder talent you can hold two weapons, one in each hand, and can make a single attack with each. This is a Full Action, and both attack rolls suffer a –20 penalty (your off-hand weapon does not suffer the normal –20 off-hand penalty on top of this)."

At first blush your argument makes sense, but beyond that the character is trained in fighting with two weapons at once it's a fighting style and you took a talent to learn how to do it effectively. The fact that your character isn't ambidextrous results in both hands suffering a -20 penalty to attack instead of -10 which they would have if they had both.

"If you do not have the Two Weapon Wielder talent and you wield two weapons at the same time, you can use a Full Action to make a single attack with each weapon. However, you suffer a –20 to the attack roll with the weapon in your dominant hand and –40 with the weapon in your off hand."

This represents a character who is neither ambidextrous nor trained in the two-weapon fighting styles. They have neither the talent nor training and suffer the highest penalties. Simple enough.

"If you have the Ambidextrous talent and Two Weapon Wielder, the penalty for each attack is only –10."

The character is ambidextrous and trained in the two-weapon fighting styles. This is represented by the reduced attack penalties to both hands; no offhand penalty (TWW) and reduced two-weapon wielder penalties (AMBI). The characters attacks benefit from being balanced both in skill and ability.

"If you have the Ambidextrous talent but not Two Weapon Wielder, you suffer –10 to the attack roll with your dominant hand and –30 with your off hand."

The character though ambidextrous hasn't been trained in the two-weapon fighting styles. The character's attack style is poor and he favors one weapon over the other regardless of ambidextrous nature.

Aside from two weapon wielding, ambidextrous, does remove the penalty associated with your offhand. This means one can use each hand equally well as long as they aren't choosing to make an attack with each in the same round (using a multiple attack action).

Thanks for the advice . As I'm reading the book again, I note that it never says the parry test is an attack, just that you test WS. I think p. 197 (TWF, 3rd bullet point) means there is no penalty since you are not attacking. However, as it says that you need to be using " a weapon, though, I imagine that you'd get no bonuses if your other weapon is a balanced one.

Hmm, I must have missed this before. Sorry to bother you all .

As far as I am aware Parrying doesn't suffer the -20 for off hand attacks. Now, the rulebook isn't 100% certain, but the exact wording looks suspiciously like a typo, as it says "Parry is not an attack and therefore does suffer the normal penalties for attacking with your off-hand," or at least something very similar. That makes no sense. I suspect the original intention was for a "not" to come after the "does". Also, I think there is an explicit explanation in one of the more recent rulebooks (I know they are not errata's for earlier books, but the two-weapon wielder bit is almost always cut and paste. This being the case even though they have had to clarify it for Dark Heresy, incorrectly in my opinion (I am of the opinion that the original intention was that someone with two-weapon wielder just couldn't make attacks with both hands at the same time), and then failed to include the clarifications (though I think Black Crusade finally sorted it out, and seems to have changed it slightly in the end).

For one, if the -20% penalty applied it would make shields utterly pointless. It also doesn't make that much sense from the purpose of real two weapon fighting, which was usually to have one weapon you normally attacked with, and another to defend with (rather than the more cinematic thing of attacking with both weapons at once). The -20 penalty applies to attacks only (non-attack actions I think are presumed to be done with the strong hand, and I think I remember there being specific special rules if you lose your strong hand).

Oh, and you don't get the bonus for a balanced weapon unless you are using it to parry.

I would also add, that shield act as Cover, providing additional AP to your arm and torso. It's always nice, even if you dont actually parry with shield. (ex. A suppression shield requires one hand to use, and provides +4 APs to that arm and the torso of the wielder. Guard shields can provide cover for the user concealing all of their body should they choose. As cover, a guard shield provides 6 Armour Points.) Also, am personaly allow shield users to Parry ranged attack, instead of Dodging them.

But not all the shields do that, at least if I remember correctly. The basic ones from the rulebook, for example. I think the cover rules were introduced to make them more appealing (or I think the very first may have been the tower shield from the INquisitor's Handbook, and that was simply to represent how bloody massive it was). An extra +5 to parrying (over a standard sword) was really not very interesting, and they had a penalty to attack and useless damage stats. The cover rule just made them more attractive (and also provided some bonus against ranged weapons).

As far as I can understand, they were never really meant to be an attacking weapon - I'm just considering their use for when your main weapon can't parry or imposes a penalty to the WS roll - such as an axe. If you have a +15 to WS tests to parry with it, it covers the main weapon's defensive weakness.

On the note of compensating for an unwieldy or unbalanced weapon my arch-militant in rogue trade currently wields a power fist on his left hand (unwieldy) and either his chainglaive or retractable forearm mounted powersword (balanced) to parry with. The great thing about the power sword other than feeling a bit like a predator is it keeps his right hand free for something like a pistol if he's trying to mix it up. This gives him the ability to do great damage with the power fist, parry with the sword, or shoot at ranged combatants.

Granted he has both two-weapon fighting talents and ambidextrous so he has a lot of choices in how to dish it out.

Oh and the combat shields from rogue trader are pretty nifty they are forearm mounted, and allow the use of your hand for small arms i believe so if you wanted to use one coupled with a pistol or something else that falls under that category you wouldn't have to worry about an off hand technically.

The_Shaman said:

NGL said:

Lacking Ambidexterity is to LACK the same level of skill as the primary hand with the alternative hand. Therefore, having an Ambidexterity talent really aught to reduce the penalties ONLY for the off-hand, since that's the hand now gaining PARITY with the primary.

Two Weapon Wielding is the style involved in efficiently attacking with both weapons. It is a general increase in capability when trying to clobber someone with a weapon in both hands. To me, it just seems logical that it would decrease the penalties across the board, from both primary AND off-hand.

I'm not saying it CAN'T make sense, just that the other way makes more sense. I mean, honestly, look at what I bolded. He sucks at using his off-hand more, regardless of the parity between his hands? Focusing on a single weapon to attack to describe a TWW fighting style just seems, to ME, to describe someone with a dominant primary hand used, well, dominantly, and the off-hand used sparingly/opportunistically. What describes someone who isn't particularly GOOD at it, but can attack with either hand equally well? -20/-20 all the way.

The penalties only apply to ATTACKING with you offhand, not defending.

Page 197 DH Core
4th bullet point

If you’re wielding a melee weapon as one of your
two weapons you may make a Parry once each Round
as a Reaction as normal with this weapon, though
you still may not Parry more than once in a Round.
This Weapon Skill Test is not an attack, and therefore
it does not suffer the standard penalty for attacks made
using your secondary hand.

The main core book has a type, the word NOT is not included, this is corrected in the RT Core book (page 246, fourth bullet point)