Because 2 handed weapons suck I thought of this house rule.

I think that 2 handed weapons suck because the -1 to win the fight is just too bad you basically have to have a good fight value to make them a little bit viable. Beserkers who are boss have 2 handed weapons but using "hand weapon" is far better. Generally you use 2 handed weapons against trolls or big defence guys. You also need to combo them with single handed figure so you have a better chance to win.

Anyway here it is...

If you choose to fight with a 2-handed weapon there is no -1 to the fight but if you beat your opponents roll by 2 you get +1 to wound but if you loose the fight you get a defence reduction say -1 or 2 I'm not sure need a bit of help here.

So Orc with 2 handed vs Elf. Elf rolls 2, Orc rolls 5 Orc therefore gets +1 to wound.

Also if the Orc is facing a Goblin, If the Orc rolled a 3 and Goblin a 1 the Orc would still win because he has a better fight value and therefore kind of beats the Goblin by 2.

I don't have the hobbit rulebook but I think there is a special strike similar to this.

Any thoughts appreciated. Feed back please.

_________________
Check out my WIP> viewtopic.php?f=50&t=26737

Very similar to the piercing special strike for axes and picks.

2 handed weapons are situational as -1 is very bad for fighting on your own, however if you're with a hero then it's sometimes worth doing it especially if you don't want to risk the lowering of your defence.

_________________
++ THE VANUS TEMPLE ++
Contact for commissions!

Yeah I've often thought along similar lines, particularly since the introduction of Special Strikes in the Hobbit rules. Consider now that you get the advantage/disadvantage of a Piercing Striking axe for free and yet you have to pay 2 points for a similar (but far riskier) risk vs gain trade-off with a two handed weapon.

IMO the -1 to your duel roll is far to big a disadvantage. I play with Beserkers a lot and hardly EVER go two-handed, with 2 attacks it's almost always better to guarantee the win and then use your extra dice to wound. I will only go two handed when I can be reasonably certain of winning the fight with my other dice (I'm talking about at least 4 normal dice and preferably 6 before I go two handed).

I would far rather see an alternate version of Piercing Strike. I think Piercing Strike should be a straight +2 strength if you win and -2 defence if you lose. That removes the need to roll any extra dice whilst ensuring that (in 95% of fights) whoever wins the fight will have a greater chance of wounding than if they hadn't piercing struck.

Similarly I would suggest maybe a two handed weapon makes you +3 Strength and -3 Defence or similar.

Not set on those numbers by any means, I'd just like to see some standardisation of the bonuses.

_________________
Finished 2nd in the 2014 GBHL. My Wife's so proud

Free SBG fanzine: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29569

I really like 2h weapons. I have found that if you send a 2h'er in with support I rarely have a problem, and with the new spear rules that is easier than ever.

Whilst I like this idea I'm not sure it would work, just thinking from the perspective of my wood elves I could give them elven blades and make them all strength 6 with very little downside given their terrible defence anyway which would be a little overpowered especially given their high fight value

I like 2-H weapons myself. With the spear rules modification I think it's very useful and less risky than piercing strike

_________________
Commission Painting @FB http://www.facebook.com/squyrepainting
Commission Customers include:
GBHL Youtube Channel
MiniWargaming

I like Grants idea of the rule. Furthemore, playing Hunter Orcs all the time I like to put some two handers in the mix. This is the only time I feel comfortable using them because they are low fight and often I outnumber them two to 1 anyway.

I hate the two handed rule as it is.

_________________
BLACKHAWK 2010 2013 2015 DYNASTY

I think 2 handed weapon sucks for the people who doesn't really know how to use it properly but if you know it with good stance then you can easily win.

I was against the, for the longest time, but now that I can use them with spear support, I love them! Even before the new spear rule, one could make 2h weapons worth it. Add s 2h'er to the standard shield wall/spear combo. Front row = shield, second row = spear support, and a flanker with s 2h weapon. Is it a perfect offense? No, but with 3 dice in the mix, your odds of using that +1 to dmg just went up!

I still think two handed cant be supported by spears, the momentum of the swing normally tells the user needs a wider range of movement to land a powerfull blow, having a spear behind would just annoy so as for me I dont favour the spear support on the 2 handed.

the two handed rule seems decent so far really.

If was me to do the rule I would add the following.

two handed weapons get -1 to roll to win combat
two handed weapons get +1 to wound and if a 6 is rolled to wound, the target model is knocked probe (enemies with S6 or above are unaffected by the knocked probe)



piercing strike

one handed: if the model with this special strike wins combat it gains +1S
if the model with this special strike loses combat it reduces his defence by 1.

two handed: if the model with this special strike wins combat it gains +D3S
if the model with this special strike loses combat it reduces his defence by D3.

Bash:

one handed: rule as it is

two handed: rule as it is, additionally the target suffer a S2 hit


feint:

one handed: rule as it is changed the following (reduces his fight value by 1)

two handed: rule as it is although re-roll 1s as well as 2s.

Stun:

one handed: rule as it is (but changes the following) target fight value and attacks are reduced by 1 and -1 to his shooting value (enemies with S8 or above are unnafected by this weapon special rule)


two handed: rule as it is (reduces his fight, A to 1 and shooting value 6+) (enemies with S8 or above are unnafected by this weapon special rule)

whirl:

one handed: rules at it is with the following change: model reduces his fight value by 1 for the duration of the fight, if his side wins, it makes a single strike up to 2 models in the fight.

two handed: rule as it is in addition the wielder count his enemies having -1 to their defence to work out the value required to wound them.


Range weapons:

bow: same as it is

crossbow:
deadly bolt: additionally on a roll of a 6 to wound and the model survives, it will knock probe the model (enemies with S6 or above are unnafected by this weapon special rule if the rider is killed the mount wont be knocked, if a mount has multiple wounds and suffer the crossbow special rule, it will knock down both rider and mount - warg marauder will be knocked down by this rule but since its a share profile we assume the riders will automatically saddle up the warg and wont create multiple units from this).

dwarf bow:
dwarven craftsmenship: dwarf bows allow the wearer to re-roll failed rolls of 1s to hit.

Elf bow:
Elven craftsmenship: elf bows allow the wearer to re-roll failed rolls of 1s to wound.

Great Bow: increase range to 30"

Long bow: same as it is

orc bow: same as it is

Short bow: same as it is

Slingshot: same as it is

Throwing spear: range 10"

Throwing weapon:
throwing daggers: range 8"
throwing axes: S+1


what you think? need play testing though

The Problem I have on the axe rule is that is modifying a stat line but the wound chart doesn't go below 3 to wound. therefore there is no risk to weaker models. I think it should say "you get +1 to wound if you win, and your opponent gets +1 to wound if you lose"

i see twohand rules are fine as they are i was doing test games not to long ago and 5/7 of fights them my gundabad goblin cap destroyed most of his opponets even with his lower/ tied fight value. and when facing them i have trouble winning fights some times since rolls are luck based still.