Weapon type freedom with backstab/poison

[Riev]

The 'powergaming' doesn't come because axes are too strong. Its because by the way the game is designed (whether purposefully or not), you DO have to take a hit to your combat effectiveness to switch to another weapon. If you want to poison people, use a weapon that is capable of poisoning. You just want to have maximum efficiency to poison on your chosen weapon style.

I just want full-guild magickers, but I guess we can't all eat our cake, and have it too. You chose axes or bludgeoning, you aren't capable of poisoning with them. In my eyes, changing the code because someone wants the best of both worlds is powergaming. Many guilds don't get chopping weapons, a larger number get piercing. You chose axes because they're a strong consideration in PVP, and now you want to be able to increase their potency.

Unless you're in the "No no I chose ranger, for axes, and I hunt with axes, and I need to be able to poison those scrab".

[Synthesis]

Where are people getting this idea that using spears as a primary in the first place is nerfing yourself?  If anything, the idea (as it pertains to rangers) is to make yourself -not- nerfed if you want to use chopping or slashing.

All rangers OUGHT to be using piercing as their primary style anyway, for very good reasons that have nothing to do with poison:  arrows, almost all throwing weapons, and almost all skinning weapons are piercing weapons, so if you get "caught" or forget you have one of those equipped, you can at least continue to parry at maximum effectiveness until you get your "real" weapon out.  Additionally, these are all light, so you can carry numerous backups--again, without taking a hit to your parry skill.

Many rangers now -don't- go with axes, because Northerners get a location-based starting bump to chopping, and Southerners get a similar bump to slashing, and given how difficult it is to train weapon skills, most people tend to start with that advantage and stay stuck in the rut.  Also, I'd wager that -most- rangers never branch parry at all, so switching to a weapon style that you're bad with only results in a noticeable hit to offense.

There are plenty of good primary spears and halfswords available that do just as much damage as axes.  This discussion revolving around trying to gain some sort of advantage that's inherent to axes just seems like bad theorycraft based on shadowboard nonsense, and maybe a smattering of a few very strong PCs in recent memory who happened to use axes, versus the endless stream of assassins that prioritize strength second or even third and are stuck using piercing.

[BadSkeelz]

Let's get cyclical!

You can infinite-chain the Conqueror's light attack by changing up its direction with each swing. Overwhelming an Orochi with it is fucking glorious.

btw spears are A) awesome and B) make a lot of thematic sense to use, especially for a hardscrabble rider.

[BadSkeelz]

Also axes are only "Strong" in PVP because most characters have low to nonexistent Chopping skill and consequently have worse defense against them. I don't think they actually have much higher or wider damage spreads compared to a sword or spear of equivalent value or craftsmanship.

I'm not sure if Bludgeoning weapons are powerful for the same reason (a relative lack of defense against them) or if they're actually better attacking heavily armored targets.

[BadSkeelz]

Also also poison is the tool of the weak and dishonorou anyway. Kill like god intended with extreme physical trauma.

[Armaddict]

Also axes are only "Strong" in PVP because most characters have low to nonexistent Chopping skill and consequently have worse defense against them.

That's what a certain group of people insist the mechanic is, but I've never had any anecdotal or real evidence stated for such.  They read the helpfile differently, because the wording is ambiguous on whether it means your skill in the weapon your opponent is using or your skill in the weapon you're holding.

[BadSkeelz]

Oh it's definitely a particular school of thought. I happen to subscribe to it because I do have anecdotal evidence to back it up so THERE.

I don't think I've ever been able to bait staff in to confirming whether your own Weapon Skill increases your Defense against that Weapon Skill, unfortunately.

[Armaddict]

Oh it's definitely a particular school of thought. I happen to subscribe to it because I do have anecdotal evidence to back it up so THERE.

I don't think I've ever been able to bait staff in to confirming whether your own Weapon Skill increases your Defense against that Weapon Skill, unfortunately.

We should try, right now.  Let's be subtle.

MAN.  I REMEMBER THAT TIME WHEN I WAS ETWOING AN AXE AND THE WAY THE CODE WORKS MADE IT SO NO ONE COULD DEFEND ME BECAUSE THEIR TWO HANDED SKILL SUCKED.  SO GLAD IT WORKS ON BOTH WEAPON SKILLS AND WEAPON STYLE SKILLS.

Edit:  This is why I could never succeed in Tuluk.

[BadSkeelz]

THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE TO GRIND ALL FOUR WEAPON SKILLS AND THE STYLES EQUALLY IN THE BYN U CASUL

(I'm not actually sure if the Combat skills of Dual Wielding and Two Handed have the same impact on your defense. I personally believe that the weapon skills themselves: Chopping, Slashing, Bludgeoning and Piercing/Stabbing (plus advanced) are what grant defense bonuses against themselves).

ETWO IS LOVE, ETWO IS LIFE