Request: Duel wield pistols, but with reload penalty

[nstgc]

Before anyone says tells me that flint lock pistols require two hands to reload, I am aware and my suggestion takes that into consideration.

 

So, DW pistols. First off, this is a pirate setting right? We need this for thematic reasons if nothing else.

 

Mainly though, I want to be able to fire one pistol, then a second pistol, then switch weapon sets. The issue with duel wielding pistols is that you have to do it with both hands, but I'm suggesting that the ``proper" way to DW pistols is to not reload them at all.

 

If they do get reloaded, you just need to set one aside, reload it, then set the other aside, and reload that one. Now you have two loaded guns again. So fire, recover, fire, recover, reload, reload-- much like Twin Sting, but with two reload phases, which come at a penalty.

 

Just as DW normal weapons comes with a recovery speed bonus, I suggest that DW pistols comes with a reload penalty. So, 33% boost to recovery speed and a 33% penalty to reload time. Overall, this will make DW pistols slower, but again, for the way I would use them that's fine.

Edited August 30, 2017 by nstgc

[FlintlockJazz]

Um, they have already said they are doing dual-wielding pistols (and wands too I recall).

[JerekKruger]

Dual wielding pistols has even featured in some video clips (probably one of Josh's Twitter or Instagram ones) and the character holds one pistol under their armpit whilst reloading the other, then switches to reload the first.

[nstgc]

Derp. Don't I feel silly.

[JerekKruger]

Derp. Don't I feel silly.

 

Heh, happens to us all 

[PugPug]

Um, they have already said they are doing dual-wielding pistols (and wands too I recall).

 

Wands will be cool as hell.

 

Pistols will be silly-looking unless we get revolvers, but unfortunately even if you accept the level of tech, it might be more trouble than it is worth to make the recovery system work with it (some number of attacks, then a longer delay for a reload).

[smjjames]

Revolvers as we think of them didn't exist until the 19th century, however, earlier attempts did exist, but they weren't common. I suppose one could show up ingame as an unique item.

 

Pistols are already a bit silly looking because they don't look like the guns we are used to seeing.

[algroth]

I love the look of pistols. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[PugPug]

Revolvers as we think of them didn't exist until the 19th century, however, earlier attempts did exist, but they weren't common. I suppose one could show up ingame as an unique item.

 

Pistols are already a bit silly looking because they don't look like the guns we are used to seeing.

 

Nothing silly about a one-handed blunderbuss, picturing someone with two just strikes me as silly. I suppose it would be a lot of front-loaded damage, I just don't believe someone would be doing it with these weapons if they hadn't seen it done with high-capacity magazines in an action movie. It cracks the fourth wall, if not breaks it.

[FlintlockJazz]

 

Revolvers as we think of them didn't exist until the 19th century, however, earlier attempts did exist, but they weren't common. I suppose one could show up ingame as an unique item.

 

Pistols are already a bit silly looking because they don't look like the guns we are used to seeing.

 

Nothing silly about a one-handed blunderbuss, picturing someone with two just strikes me as silly. I suppose it would be a lot of front-loaded damage, I just don't believe someone would be doing it with these weapons if they hadn't seen it done with high-capacity magazines in an action movie. It cracks the fourth wall, if not breaks it.

 

It was actually quite common historically, to the point that carrying a pair of pistols was termed a brace of pistols.

Edited August 31, 2017 by FlintlockJazz

[PugPug]

 

 

Revolvers as we think of them didn't exist until the 19th century, however, earlier attempts did exist, but they weren't common. I suppose one could show up ingame as an unique item.

 

Pistols are already a bit silly looking because they don't look like the guns we are used to seeing.

 

Nothing silly about a one-handed blunderbuss, picturing someone with two just strikes me as silly. I suppose it would be a lot of front-loaded damage, I just don't believe someone would be doing it with these weapons if they hadn't seen it done with high-capacity magazines in an action movie. It cracks the fourth wall, if not breaks it.

 

It was actually quite common historically, to the point that carrying a pair of pistols was termed a brace of pistols.

 

 

Oh, I guess I was wrong. My bad. Maybe it's the armpit thing that gets to me. It's just not very threatening. Like, "Wait right there while I fumble with these guns I can barely load without dropping."

[JerekKruger]

Oh, I guess I was wrong. My bad. Maybe it's the armpit thing that gets to me. It's just not very threatening. Like, "Wait right there while I fumble with these guns I can barely load without dropping."

 

Well to be fair, in most situations a brace of pistols wouldn't be reloaded during combat, and generally the user would fire one, holster it, draw the second and fire that: not dual wield them. In fact that's probably why braces of pistols was a thing: reloading them was slow enough that it was worthwhile to carry a second.

 

I might be wrong, but I suspect the same was true of Old West Gunfighters who carried two revolvers i.e. it wasn't to dual wield so much as to give them more shots before they needed to reload. Dual wielding pistols is, I'm guessing, a pretty difficult skill to develop and simply not that useful.

[PugPug]

 

Oh, I guess I was wrong. My bad. Maybe it's the armpit thing that gets to me. It's just not very threatening. Like, "Wait right there while I fumble with these guns I can barely load without dropping."

 

Well to be fair, in most situations a brace of pistols wouldn't be reloaded during combat, and generally the user would fire one, holster it, draw the second and fire that: not dual wield them. In fact that's probably why braces of pistols was a thing: reloading them was slow enough that it was worthwhile to carry a second.

 

I might be wrong, but I suspect the same was true of Old West Gunfighters who carried two revolvers i.e. it wasn't to dual wield so much as to give them more shots before they needed to reload. Dual wielding pistols is, I'm guessing, a pretty difficult skill to develop and simply not that useful.

 

 

Yeah, when you can only shoot once, you don't want it to miss.

[Ad Hoc]

Blackbeard apparently carried six pistols into battle. Here's hoping for six equipment slots.

[nstgc]

Blackbeard apparently carried six pistols into battle. Here's hoping for six equipment slots.

With DW and three slots, you get six pistols.

[Boeroer]

An Island Aumaua (sadly no beard at all) could even carry 8 pistols into battle.

 

Maybe he could grow some dorsal hair and call himself "Backbeard".

Edited September 4, 2017 by Boeroer

[JerekKruger]

An Island Aumaua (sadly no beard at all) could even carry 8 pistols into battle.

 

I bet Black Beard wished he was an Island Aumaua.

[Boeroer]

But a genetically abnormal one who could grow facial hair I guess.

 

Seriously that's the main reason I seldomly play male aumaua(s?) - they lack a beard for complete and utter badassery.

Edited September 4, 2017 by Boeroer

[KDubya]

Have any of you actually tried dual wielding pistols? It does not work like in the movies, you can't hit anything smaller than the broadside of a barn.

 

In game you can fire a pistol, switch to another pistol and fire that, switch to another pistol and fire that and then pull out your sabre. This of course requires Island Aumaua, the extra weapon slot and maybe quick switch. Allowing dual wield pistols basically gives the Island Aumaua ability to anyone.

 

As it is I never reloaded a firearm, I'd fire and then switch. Sustained ranged damage always came from bows unless it was some combat ineffective character like Durance who just putzed around with an arquebus.

 

 

Why would everyone not dual wield pistols if they are allowed? No one is planning on reloading a pistol anyway so getting another free shot is all just gravy unless there is some sort of accuracy malus that makes it a bad idea at which point why bother with dual wielding? It will either be the go to choice for gun volleys or never touched.

Edited September 6, 2017 by KDubya

[MaxQuest]

As it is I never reloaded a firearm, I'd fire and then switch. Sustained ranged damage always came from bows unless it was some combat ineffective character like Durance who just putzed around with an arquebus.

Exactly) 

 

Why would everyone not dual wield pistols if they are allowed? No one is planning on reloading a pistol anyway so getting another free shot is all just gravy unless there is some sort of accuracy malus that makes it a bad idea at which point why bother with dual wielding? It will either be the go to choice for gun volleys or never touched.

It would be nice if the "accuracy malus" would not be just plain -acc, but rather something like:

- you have -10 acc when dual-wielding firearms 

- all misses have a 25% chance to hit an adjacent target (per target)

[Boeroer]

Too complicated in my opinion.

 

Since pistols are inferior to blunderbusses and arquebuses - especially if you don't use reload - I think it's ok to allow a second shot with them.

 

It's like Twin Sting mechanics.

 

I'm more concerned with dual implements being too powerful.