My Bounty Hunter has a drawn vibroblade and is currently engaged with my acquisition's bodyguard (who is wielding a vibro axe).

I decide that this is not a situation that favors me, so I want to disengage and move to short range so that I can plug him with my disrupter pistol instead.

From what I can glean from the Core Rulebook (pg. 202), this just requires a single maneuver. I carefully back away and am now in short range.

I don't have to spend a maneuver to "disengage", and then another to move to short range.

Am I reading this right?

I think I'm having a bit of SAGA edition hangover here, so I want to make sure I'm doing this correctly.

My Bounty Hunter has a drawn vibroblade and is currently engaged with my acquisition's bodyguard (who is wielding a vibro axe).

I decide that this is not a situation that favors me, so I want to disengage and move to short range so that I can plug him with my disrupter pistol instead.

From what I can glean from the Core Rulebook (pg. 202), this just requires a single maneuver. I carefully back away and am now in short range.

I don't have to spend a maneuver to "disengage", and then another to move to short range.

Am I reading this right?

I think I'm having a bit of SAGA edition hangover here, so I want to make sure I'm doing this correctly.

Correct. As per 'Engage or Disengage from an opponent' on pages 202-203, one maneuver changes your range band from Engaged to Short.

What?! No Attack of Opportunity?

I may be having some WFRP hangover but is there no additional maneuver required to put the vibroblade away and draw the blaster?

What?! No Attack of Opportunity?

That's quite enough of that =P

I may be having some WFRP hangover but is there no additional maneuver required to put the vibroblade away and draw the blaster?

That would indeed require a maneuver. The specific maneuver is on page 205, and is called "Manage Gear".

I may be having some WFRP hangover but is there no additional maneuver required to put the vibroblade away and draw the blaster?

There is, as far as I understand it, but he could sacrifice his action or take 2 strain for that maneuver. If he takes the strain he can still shoot as well. =)

Forgot to mention that if he has the "Quick draw" talent he may draw the pistol as an incidental (he would still have to put the sword away though).

In fact that may be the only way he could shoot, since I believe putting the sword away would be a maneuver and so would drawing the pistol (so two separate maneuvers). Since you are capped at 2 maneuvers, he wouldnt be able to draw until his next turn without quick draw.

What?! No Attack of Opportunity?

That's quite enough of that =P

It's actually a fair comment considering what the maneuver* does. It is the equivalent of the 5 foot step to avoid an AoO.

I think a more relevant question is whether as GM you'd allow someone to run away without a disengage and suffer for it.

* I have to retrain myself not to use the British spelling that WFRP uses.

Forgot to mention that if he has the "Quick draw" talent he may draw the pistol as an incidental (he would still have to put the sword away though).

In fact that may be the only way he could shoot, since I believe putting the sword away would be a maneuver and so would drawing the pistol (so two separate maneuvers). Since you are capped at 2 maneuvers, he wouldnt be able to draw until his next turn without quick draw.

Since we are going down this road, he could drop the vibroblade as an incidental.

Maneuver #1 - disengage to short range

Incidental - drop vibroblade

Maneuver #2 - take 2 strain and draw pistol

Action - fire said pistol

There are rules for fighting with two one-handed weapons. I don't think there is any need to drop or sheath the sword to draw the pistol.

And since you aren't technically using both weapons at the same time, you could use the second maneuver and suffer 2 strain to whip out that pistol and shoot it with your left hand, retaining your vibroblade in your other hand for the inevitable time when the guy is going to come back and try to hit you again. You don't get penalties for shooting a blaster with your other hand full, since it only takes one hand. You only get the dual-wielding penalties when you are actively trying to fight with both of your hands at one time. No need to make yourself unprepared for combat!

In this instance I would be inclined to add 1 or 2 setback dice for firing a weapon in your off-hand, I know this isn't mentioned in the RAW but is narratively appropriate.

I could see adding one, but definitely not two. Not for something as minor as holding a sword in your off hand.

In this instance I would be inclined to add 1 or 2 setback dice for firing a weapon in your off-hand, I know this isn't mentioned in the RAW but is narratively appropriate.

It depends on how he learned to fight. If he learned to fight with the knive in his left hand, it would make sense to let him fight that way. You can make the player choose which hand he learned with. After all, the main gauche was intended to be used left handed as a defensive and opportunity weapon.

But the example was about using a pistol in his off-hand, and unless that is how you trained it would be quite a feat to pull off.

However, this hasn't come up for me yet so it was just a suggestion.

There is no such thing as an off-hand per RAW. Also, considering the length of rounds and the like, there is nothing stopping you from changing hand holding knife/sword and then drawing blaster as one manoeuvre, at least not in my opinion.

Of course, if the player decided that he should be using his off-hand and should be penalised, sure, slap on a setback die.

What if the player designates his left hand as his main hand for shooting and his right hand for melee? He could just walk around with a gun in one hand and a sword in the other. He would never need to ready a weapon. Dinner parties might be a little awkward.

What if the player designates his left hand as his main hand for shooting and his right hand for melee? He could just walk around with a gun in one hand and a sword in the other. He would never need to ready a weapon. Dinner parties might be a little awkward.

You can absolutely do this. In fact, I fully intend to do this some time because I love the sword and pistol fighting style personally. And I'm personally going to house rule that if you are using a melee weapon in your off hand, and you shoot someone who is engaged, you don't give them a boost dice on their attacks against you because you have a melee weapon to defend yourself with still.

What if the player designates his left hand as his main hand for shooting and his right hand for melee? He could just walk around with a gun in one hand and a sword in the other. He would never need to ready a weapon. Dinner parties might be a little awkward.

You can absolutely do this. In fact, I fully intend to do this some time because I love the sword and pistol fighting style personally. And I'm personally going to house rule that if you are using a melee weapon in your off hand, and you shoot someone who is engaged, you don't give them a boost dice on their attacks against you because you have a melee weapon to defend yourself with still.

Metal Gear CQC style? Pistol aimed with a blade hand stabilizing, and ready to switch?

Mental Picture = Deadly

I wonder if later additions will add special combat styles. Anyone with other FFG gaming experience able to say if this have been done for other FFG games?

Exactly! Super hardcore.

I'm REALLY hoping that F&D adds lightsaber forms!

My friend is playing a Gand marauder in my upcoming campaign and is using the Knife-and-Baton fighting style utilized by one of the main characters in The Raid: Redemption. Super sick