Login to BatWeb
Forgot your password?
BatMUD Forums > Ideas-wanted > Re: One weapon wielding
if you only have one weapon, how about a feature like
wield sword in left and right, which would give like +hit because
you have more control over the blade (samurai style beotch)
- blackstar -
wield sword in left and right, which would give like +hit because
you have more control over the blade (samurai style beotch)
- blackstar -
Rating:
-9
Votes:
27
I'd like to second the motion. I'd say even that it should be possible for
tank to be effective even with one weapon, which would mean fairly major
+hit/dam bonuses.
Why? Ever since historical times, _most_ combatants have preferred one weapon
over two. There is a reason for that - you _can_ hit harder using two hands
than one with most weapons. Also, handling's much easier (I've done bit of
playing with some toy medieval weapons so I know this from firsthand
experience also).
Currently it's somewhat sad that Bat is only 'everyone uses weapon per hand'
model, as practically say, in historical Japan _everyone_ used just one weapon
until about 16th century or so, and even then two-sword combat wasn't hugely
popular.
And I believe that in Europe the two-weapon combat was even more rare, and for
a good reason! (Ok, parrying dagger, yes, but two damage-dealing weapons? Give
me a break.)
Practical suggestion? Give say +50-X% damage modifier and some serious +hit if
you're using one weapon instead of two. (This isn't uptune as such, but I
think it might be still fun)
tank to be effective even with one weapon, which would mean fairly major
+hit/dam bonuses.
Why? Ever since historical times, _most_ combatants have preferred one weapon
over two. There is a reason for that - you _can_ hit harder using two hands
than one with most weapons. Also, handling's much easier (I've done bit of
playing with some toy medieval weapons so I know this from firsthand
experience also).
Currently it's somewhat sad that Bat is only 'everyone uses weapon per hand'
model, as practically say, in historical Japan _everyone_ used just one weapon
until about 16th century or so, and even then two-sword combat wasn't hugely
popular.
And I believe that in Europe the two-weapon combat was even more rare, and for
a good reason! (Ok, parrying dagger, yes, but two damage-dealing weapons? Give
me a break.)
Practical suggestion? Give say +50-X% damage modifier and some serious +hit if
you're using one weapon instead of two. (This isn't uptune as such, but I
think it might be still fun)
Rating:
13
Votes:
15
Ok.. Some people claim that I didn't quite rant about everything. So, here we
go. First of all, yes, I know about offhand penalty. And yes, it's
ridiculously low (especially given negate), bordering on not even noticeable.
So few ideas: Uptune one-weapon-only damage/hit LOT, make weapon+shield
feasible for offtanking by giving slight bonus even with one weapon only, and
finally upgrade offhand penalty!
One interesting thing to do would be also to provide some sort of skills for
using shield for effective blocking, as currently shield seems to be only
+decrease crits.
go. First of all, yes, I know about offhand penalty. And yes, it's
ridiculously low (especially given negate), bordering on not even noticeable.
So few ideas: Uptune one-weapon-only damage/hit LOT, make weapon+shield
feasible for offtanking by giving slight bonus even with one weapon only, and
finally upgrade offhand penalty!
One interesting thing to do would be also to provide some sort of skills for
using shield for effective blocking, as currently shield seems to be only
+decrease crits.
Rating:
13
Votes:
13
Hmm I remember writing a pretty long ideas.wanted post some months ago about
this. My point being especially in providing trainable skills which would
enable one-weapon users some advantages, making it an option worth
considering.
In my opinion the best solution would be, that using one or two weapons would
really affect in your playing style, and some guilds (like locs, for example)
would have better skills in using only one weapon and more reckless guilds
like Reavers or Barbarians would be better with 2 weapons.
In addition there might be just the kind of tweaks, that make one option
better sometimes. For example, better hit/parry chance when using only one,
but on the other hand better damage when using two weapons. I'd rather do a
bit less dam and have a higher chance to block blows when I solo.
The final suggestion is, that different weapons could have bonuses depending
on whether you use them in one or two hands. All the big weapons of course
being those that are better to use in two hands.
-Tsuran rambling again
this. My point being especially in providing trainable skills which would
enable one-weapon users some advantages, making it an option worth
considering.
In my opinion the best solution would be, that using one or two weapons would
really affect in your playing style, and some guilds (like locs, for example)
would have better skills in using only one weapon and more reckless guilds
like Reavers or Barbarians would be better with 2 weapons.
In addition there might be just the kind of tweaks, that make one option
better sometimes. For example, better hit/parry chance when using only one,
but on the other hand better damage when using two weapons. I'd rather do a
bit less dam and have a higher chance to block blows when I solo.
The final suggestion is, that different weapons could have bonuses depending
on whether you use them in one or two hands. All the big weapons of course
being those that are better to use in two hands.
-Tsuran rambling again
Rating:
4
Votes:
6
Daerid wrote:
I'd like to second the motion. I'd say even that it should be possible for
tank to be effective even with one weapon, which would mean fairly major
+hit/dam bonuses.
Why? Ever since historical times, _most_ combatants have preferred one weapon
over two. There is a reason for that - you _can_ hit harder using two hands
than one with most weapons. Also, handling's much easier (I've done bit of
playing with some toy medieval weapons so I know this from firsthand
experience also).
Currently it's somewhat sad that Bat is only 'everyone uses weapon per hand'
model, as practically say, in historical Japan _everyone_ used just one weapon
until about 16th century or so, and even then two-sword combat wasn't hugely
popular.
And I believe that in Europe the two-weapon combat was even more rare, and for
a good reason! (Ok, parrying dagger, yes, but two damage-dealing weapons? Give
me a break.)
Practical suggestion? Give say +50-X% damage modifier and some serious +hit if
you're using one weapon instead of two. (This isn't uptune as such, but I
think it might be still fun)
tank to be effective even with one weapon, which would mean fairly major
+hit/dam bonuses.
Why? Ever since historical times, _most_ combatants have preferred one weapon
over two. There is a reason for that - you _can_ hit harder using two hands
than one with most weapons. Also, handling's much easier (I've done bit of
playing with some toy medieval weapons so I know this from firsthand
experience also).
Currently it's somewhat sad that Bat is only 'everyone uses weapon per hand'
model, as practically say, in historical Japan _everyone_ used just one weapon
until about 16th century or so, and even then two-sword combat wasn't hugely
popular.
And I believe that in Europe the two-weapon combat was even more rare, and for
a good reason! (Ok, parrying dagger, yes, but two damage-dealing weapons? Give
me a break.)
Practical suggestion? Give say +50-X% damage modifier and some serious +hit if
you're using one weapon instead of two. (This isn't uptune as such, but I
think it might be still fun)
spar with those who use one lareger weapon in two hands, sword and shield
style, and two weapon style. i find two weapon fighters much harder to defeat
followed by sword and shield and lastly the fuckers wielding two handed
weapons easiest to defeat but this is just me
Rating:
-8
Votes:
8
Not to completely contradict Veldrin's SCA knowledge of weapon handling, but I
was under the impression that the SCA members were not trying to actively kill
each other. Anything from a solid thumping to a slight touch was the same
"wound" and, as such, +damage wasn't really necessary. Daerid was asking for
+damage for two-handed weapons, and whether or not his idea gets implimented,
he has a valid point. There are, however, already certain advantages to
wielding a certain weapon two-handed (but not forcewielding), in particular
with skill hits. If you turn parry to 51 and wait for the skill hits, you
might find a single large weapon works better than two small ones.
Shinarae Lluminus
was under the impression that the SCA members were not trying to actively kill
each other. Anything from a solid thumping to a slight touch was the same
"wound" and, as such, +damage wasn't really necessary. Daerid was asking for
+damage for two-handed weapons, and whether or not his idea gets implimented,
he has a valid point. There are, however, already certain advantages to
wielding a certain weapon two-handed (but not forcewielding), in particular
with skill hits. If you turn parry to 51 and wait for the skill hits, you
might find a single large weapon works better than two small ones.
Shinarae Lluminus
Rating:
-1
Votes:
1
Shinarae wrote:
Not to completely contradict Veldrin's SCA knowledge of weapon handling, but I
was under the impression that the SCA members were not trying to actively kill
each other. Anything from a solid thumping to a slight touch was the same
"wound" and, as such, +damage wasn't really necessary. Daerid was asking for
+damage for two-handed weapons, and whether or not his idea gets implimented,
he has a valid point. There are, however, already certain advantages to
wielding a certain weapon two-handed (but not forcewielding), in particular
with skill hits. If you turn parry to 51 and wait for the skill hits, you
might find a single large weapon works better than two small ones.
Shinarae Lluminus
was under the impression that the SCA members were not trying to actively kill
each other. Anything from a solid thumping to a slight touch was the same
"wound" and, as such, +damage wasn't really necessary. Daerid was asking for
+damage for two-handed weapons, and whether or not his idea gets implimented,
he has a valid point. There are, however, already certain advantages to
wielding a certain weapon two-handed (but not forcewielding), in particular
with skill hits. If you turn parry to 51 and wait for the skill hits, you
might find a single large weapon works better than two small ones.
Shinarae Lluminus
trying to kill each other ...we get drunk and bash each other with rattan in
full armour so it is really full contact peopel get knocked out and stuff
sometimes
Rating:
-5
Votes:
5
© 1990-2025 Balanced Alternative Techniques ry. All rights reserved. BatMUD™ is a registered trademark of Balanced Alternative Techniques ry.
The individual comments are the property of their posters, and may not reflect the views or opinions of the administration.