TOPIC: Nightshade's +2 Short Sword for Trade

Back to Mike's question... I have a new Long Sword +2 that could be up for trade for Nightshade. Still available?

There is nothing saying which hand HAS to be Primary...a Ranger player could be LEFT handed - hence the wording the way it is. (but after I say that - the Character Class Summary sheet specifically says Right hand is Primary, and Left is offhand...but that is just not right - it should be based on the player is my thought.)<br /><br />We will get Jeff and or Dave to rule on this and get it taken care of really quick.<br /><br />Could be a nice new change that was just not communicated down the line...<br /><br /><br /><br />

<br />has it ever actually come up before that a player wanted to use two short swords as a ranger and been told they couldnt?  if so (and i guess the reason was because of D&D rules), then why wasnt that included in the TD rules anywhere?  at least, i cant find anything like that.  from the newest players guide, in the section for ranger:<br />"The ranger is one of the classes with the unique advantage of being able to slide two pucks in melee, one with each hand at the same time during combat.  This double attack can quickly turn the tide of battle.  They can choose from the following for their right hand: Dagger, short sword, scimitar, long sword, spear, heavy mace, hand axe, or battle axe.  And for their left hand: Dagger, hand axe, or short sword."<br />then it goes on to other abilities.  nothing about the left hand weapon being dependant upon what is in your right hand.  also, from the token guide under the weapons usability section:<br />"Ranger: He must always use two weapons in melee.  He must choose from below:<br />right hand: dagger, short sword, scimitar, long sword, spear, heavy mace, hand axe, or battle axe.<br />left hand: dagger, hand axe, or short sword.<br />ranged weapons: "...<br />again, nothing about needing smaller weapon in left hand.  in fact, the dagger being listed as an option for right hand use, and the 'must' use two weapons seems to imply that there is no conditional relationship.  if someone has a TD rule somewhere that i missed, please point it out.  though, i really hope that it doesnt even come up and i get a +2 keen scimitar (or +2 longsword) before gencon, but it would be good to sort this out.  if rangers (for TD) are required to have a larger weapon in right hand, it should be stated somewhere.<br />thanks,<br />kent<br />

You're better off trading for a girdle. It basically gives you a bonus to both weapons and is better than dual weilding two NSSS's or a NSSS and LS+2. <br /><br />NSSS/LS+1/Girdle gives 7.3 and 6.5 after all. That's better than 6.3, 6.3 or 6.3, 6.5.

<br />You're better off trading for a girdle. It basically gives you a bonus to both weapons and is better than dual weilding two NSSS's or a NSSS and LS+2. <br /><br />NSSS/LS+1/Girdle gives 7.3 and 6.5 after all. That's better than 6.3, 6.3 or 6.3, 6.5. <br />

<br /><br />heh, well, actually, the girdle and a nightshade's sword were my choices for my original purchase (see, i was already thinking like you ), a recent order got me a second nightshades sword, and i actually traded a pile o' reds for a second girdle (either for a friend to use, or to trade).

Nothing says "I love you" like loaning a Girdle!  I have three - two for loaners!

<br />Page 6 of the Players guide is not very specific, in fact it is confusing...<br />

<br /><br />Actually, the way it is worded now, the Player's Guide and Token Guide are pretty clear in that you can use 2 Shortswords together.<br /><br />If this isn't the case, then those guides need to be changed.  But for simplicity, I think its better to just list which weapon can be used in which hand as it is now.

<br />Actually, the way it is worded now, the Player's Guide and Token Guide are pretty clear in that you can use 2 Shortswords together.

<br /><br />By not specific I mean - it has no mention of a size difference requirement...which was always the rule in the past, but even so - I have the Character Class Summary sheets from last year - and they too do not mention a size difference rule...so I think it could go either way.<br /><br />

<br />If this isn't the case, then those guides need to be changed.  But for simplicity, I think its better to just list which weapon can be used in which hand as it is now.<br />

<br /><br />It very well could be helpful to assign a Primary hand and Off hand - like the Character Class Summary sheet attempted to do - but then state that the Primary hand can not use anything smaller than a Long Sword, or Heavy Mace or Battle Axe, etc.  The Off hand would get, Short Sword, Dagger, hand axe, etc.

A list for each hand like as follows :<br /><br />Primary hand:<br />

---

<br />Longsword<br />Heavy Mace<br />Battle Axe<br />...<br /><br />Off Hand:<br />

---

<br />Dagger <br />Short sword<br />Knife<br />...<br /><br />Or something along those lines would be nice. But then would the ranger be limited to only those weapons or would all weapons available be covered in the 2 list's.. <br /><br /><br />You may also get the person saying "So I can't use a Shortsword in my primary hand and then offhand a knife?" <br /><br />You know there is always one or two of them out there!! <br /><br />

Well when I would DM games in which there was a ranger back in 2.0 I allowed them to use 2 shortswords or a shortsword and a dagger.  I never agreed with the fact that you could use a longsword and a shortsword but not 2 shortswords.<br /><br />It seems safe to say if you can handle a LS and a SS then you could easily switch to 2 SS since it would take far less skill to master the latter.

<br />You know there is always one or two of them out there!! <br />

<br /><br />indeed there are...when i first looked at playing ranger, before i really knew much of anything about token rarity, i thought it would be cool to use dual +2 daggers  i believe my original thought (other than just being cool to only be using daggers) was that daggers should be easier to get ahold of than larger weapons.

<br />It seems safe to say if you can handle a LS and a SS then you could easily switch to 2 SS since it would take far less skill to master the latter.<br />

<br /><br />Umm..Less skill? I would wager that being skilled at a short sword would require more skill. You don't have the advantage of reach. Two equally skilled individuals, one with a LS and one with a SS, and you have to give the bout to whoever has reach.

<br />it has no mention of a size difference requirement...which was always the rule in the past, but even so...<br />

<br /><br />Was this a rule in the past?  I know that Rangers generally do use LS/SS but this was because of damage maxing.  I looked at some of my older guides and couldn't find any mention of it.