Region and Armor?

[Anonymous]

It strikes me as odd after reading the section on northern and southern fighting styles.  The reasons make sense, but it doesn't seem to fit the game.  I've noticed the opposite.  Given the north, heavily influenced by nomads, tribals and such in their culture and clothing, tend to fight in less to no armor.  Not to mention the raw materials, (generally bug shells) are easier found and cheaper in the south.  I also noticed the south where the scrabs and stuff roam tend to wear it, so, I almost wonder if the fighting styles in the reguards of armor at least might be switched.?

[Teleri]

It does seem to be rather unfortunate that most people would rather outfit their characters in something that gives the maximum amount of protection from a successful strike than something that would make sense for the southern region.  However, I don't seem to notice the lighter armors and clothing being used so much in the northlands by other players, unless they are hunting.  I see the switch from light to heavy armors in the south being mostly an OOC notion that the stronger the armor, the better the survivability of a successful hit against the player's character, and thus more and more people might tend to use it.  Thus, people seem to ignore the fact that most all southern fighting styles rely upon avoidance and using the manueverablility provided by light sandcloth and leather, not to mention that it would likely be a lot less uncomfortable to wear in the especially hot southern climate.  True, there are lots of scrabs, but I would see the characters originally from and taught how to fight in Vrun Driath to ignore the use of the scrab's shell for armor that would render one hot, tired, and very slow to move.  Instead, given the sharpness of a well-made chitin blade versus that of bone, and one being possibly lighter than one made of obsidian or other stone, I would think that the southerners would turn to the shells for weapons.

I would like to see a lot more of the southern PCs to use light leather and sandcloth armor, possibly even just wear regular tunics and trousers made out of one or a few layers of some sort of cloth.  Of course, this would not provide much protection, and a hit from an opponent could cause the player to have his or her character lose a considerable amount of hp from it, but it would fit better with the game world.  It's not that the styles chosen to be for the north or the south don't fit in with the game world, it's that the preferences of players don't match those of the region they are in.  

When it comes to the northlands, I mostly see people using the standard shell armors, shields, two matched weapon combos, or a single weapon and shield, which all fits in very well with the Tuluki region.  However, I see only guard-type characters and soldiers using these, as hunting would require more manueverablility than the heavy, rigid shell could afford to provide, and all that heavy armor would give your position away easily.  

From what I have observed in past characters, it is mostly the weapons styles that seem to stray away from the doctrines of fighting traditionally taught in either region.  I think that it is fine for that to happen, in some rare cases, but perhaps the characters in the south using two greataxes at the same time, or those in the northlands using a single sword and no shield would be labelled as coming from the opposite area, shunned, and looked down on for their unorthodox styles of combat.  From what I saw (maybe things have changed in an RL year), more players in the southlands seemed to have their characters use paired weapons of the same type, ie: two swords, two axes, two clubs, and nearly none used a single sword.  Also, from the emotes I saw these players using in the handling of these weapons, I would have deemed the style of handling such weapons to be far too flashy for the south (rolling, spinning, twirling blades, "artful" combat styles).  The documents on fighting in Allanak clearly state that usually only one weapon, or a large weapon and smaller dagger or such, are used in a manner that is quick, yet intended to kill quickly and in the most direct manner possible.

I don't see that anything should be changed in the documents regarding either style of armor or fighting, it's just the perceptions and decisions of the players themselves that turn combat into something that does not fit the region that their character learned to fight in.  Of course, not everyone has to follow these majority styles of combat in their characters based on where they are from, it is just that it seems that people are more interested in taking advantage of the code, rather than the roleplaying experience of using a specific style based on region in regards to armor or weapons.  Sure, using both of those obsidian greataxes at the same time using dual wield would be sweet, and it would be really tight if you can twirl them around and work rings around your opponent with flashy moves...it would look cool, and cause a lot of damage.  But, one must ask themselves: would it make sense, if my character is from Allanak and supposedly learned how to fight from their parents who were trained in the same location (along with the rest of their ancestors)?

[Anonymous]

I don't really see it as a big deal, although I try to stay somewhat in line with the fighting styles document I really just outfit my characters in what I think looks cool and if it's not perfectly in line with what the fighting styles document says I don't sweat too much about it.  Although scrab shell is heavier than leather it's not really heavy armor, more moderate really.  I personally like seeing southern warriors decked out in scrab shell because it's such a southern material.

I do completely agree about the weapon styles however, especially when it comes to dual wield.  A couple warriors using scrab shell shields is cool and makes sense but I think it would add a lot to the feel of the game for southern warriors if southern warriors used a large and small weapon.  The problem with this however is the major mercenary and training organization of Allanak does not allow you to train in two different weapon types when you join which doesn't make any sense because it is this clan that would have most likely developed the southern style of fighting.  If you decided you want to use a sword as your main weapon with a back up dagger for parrying they will make you choose between two swords or two daggers.  Seeing as how the clan I'm talking about trains at least half of the serious warriors in the south this rule has to be changed if you want to see the styles practiced as they are in the document.

[Barzalene]

Lighter armor in the south... fighting in tunics....no.
I disagree. Mind you, I have read the docs, and I love the idea of products of the north and south being very different, but the truth is when someone's chasing you about with an sid halberd, you don't want to be wearing nothing but your shirt.

There is lighter, and there is lighter.

Bone armor, solid pieice of armor (ie carved from a single piece or serveral large pieces of shell fitted together to look like one) are going to be heavier than something with thin and flexible properties.

So, I agree, southern armor should be lighter, but not less effective. It would be nice if Salarr's selection in their northern and southern shops was very different. But I think first someone should really pin down what light armor is. Is there more to it than just cuirboulli?

[Rindan]

I think the biggest reason why southerns don't even attempt to conform to the docs is two fold.  First, most organizations won't let you conform until you have advance past recruit.  Most organizations force you to pick a single weapon.  Further, most organizations don't even have training weapons in the most obvious secondary weapon, a dagger.  If you go to the Byn and tell them you prefer daggers, they are going to shove a spear in your face (at least they did last time I tried) and tell you that that is close enough.  Secondly, most organizations in the south encourage you to deck one's self out in as much armor as possible.  The picture of a light weight warrior is discouraged by the only organization that has the capacity to train every day Joes.  I think the Byn could change the trend very quickly if they simply taught southern style combat in the south.  The vast majority of the fighting types in the south go through the Byn at least for a year or two, and I imagine the effect would quickly spread to the rest of Allanak.

[Krath]

I have to agree 100% with Rindan's post. That is all I will say, if you want my opinion PM me, but he pretty much covered it.

[Zhaira]

Please try to stay away from discussing game mechanics on the GDB (or elsewhere, for that matter).  Thanks.

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

Okay, I have to defend myself from the Byn-bashers here... So lez' go!

First of all, Rindan... I'm sorry to hear that you got a spear shoved in your face. Whoever did that must have been being a jerk-off for IC reasons. There are 'training daggers', and as far as I know, no one makes a big deal about handing them out. They exist, and the Byn and other big warrior employers offer training in them, I'm positive of this.

Now, as for the one weapon type policy itself... This only applies to enty-level recruits. There are IC reasons for the rule, I assure you, although the rule's origins are probably OOCly based. Furthermore, they only deal with -training- weapons. Any member of the Byn, even the Runners, are allowed to charge into battle with whatever they have at hand. If you want to take eight tomahawks, a shield and four halberds into battle, go right on ahead. My current character, actually, used the 'traditional' Southern-style of a large sword and smaller sword or dagger while fighting, but was limited to two sparring swords for training. It really didn't make a huge difference... He was trained with the sword, and expiremented with daggers on the field. Not a bad way to go, actually.

And once again, I must restate that this policy only refers to entry-level employees. Once they're promoted to anything higher than the bottom of the ladder, they can change their fighting styles like they change their underwear, for all I care.

Now, on how Southerners shouldn't wear chitin... Why the heck not? It's there, in great abundance, in a -DESERT- where pretty much everything is scare. People are gonna use it, espicially in a place where you greatest natural resource is sand. Could you honestly see some one saying 'Hmm, I -could- buy that chitin breastplate, or I could charge out into battle naked... I'm a Southerner, so I guess I'll go naked. Yeah, that makes sense.' If the Southerners have chitin, they're gonna use it. Of course, they're going to keep mobility and temperature in mind, and probably more than a northerner would. But personally, I see nothing impractical with a chitin helmet or breastplate. I can understand frustrations at seeing a Southerner stomp around in full mek-bone greaves and an obsidian cuirass... But I really don't see much of that. The Southern 'norm' for armor, as I've seen, is a chitin or bone helmet and breastplate, and a whole buttload of leather and sandcloth. That sounds mobile enough for me.

As for what a 'Southern style' is, I think you all have some pretty limited views (no offense). I'm about to jump on the whole 'Anti-Tuluk, Tuluk is bringing the Southern-man down!' conspiracy wagon, so if you're sick of crap like that, stop reading now. It's garbage, really...  :wink:

The feeling I get is that Southern fighters should be light-weight, wearing only sandcloth and leather, and should use two weapons, as long as one of them is smaller than the other. Northerners should use a shield, and... That's it. That's the only requirement. As long as they got a shield, they then can feel free to turn themselves into full-wood platemail monstrosities. I feel there are some things I have to say about this...

The two-handed sword-and-dagger style is strictly Southern. However, that is not the -only- style avaliable to a Southerner. Maybe they decided they'd rather have two swords, and parry with one while striking with another. This is -inspired- by the 'classic Southern' style, and because of that, does it not mean it's 'Southern' itself? Similarly, some one could take the sword-and-dagger style, and adapt it for clubs (a, from my experience, more 'Northern' weapon). This style wouldn't be strictly from the North or South, but due to it's similarity in style, it would be 'Southern' influenced.

And anyways, for those of you that don't feel the 'Southern' style is RPed well, then all I can say is you're not looking in the right places, or hard enough. Granted, certainly not everyone plays with the two-handed sword-and-dagger style, or even a Southernly-influenced style, but there are players that do it. Heck, I'm one of them. I know of characters that consider shields 'unnecasary' or 'cowardly', and pass this rhretoric onto young Southerners. I've also heard Southerners consider a piece of armor's 'maneveurability' or 'weight' before purchasing it. It does happen, but if you're all saying it needs to happen more, I hear you. I'll see to it that it does.

In general, I feel the styles can be summed up like this...
Southerner: Two-weapons, lighter armor
Northerner: Weapon and shield, heavier armor

These two 'styles' can  be interpreted many different ways, and each branch off into their own 'sub-styles'. Similarly, there are many people that fight with only one weapon and no shield, or with a large two-handed weapon like a polearm. They must be from either the North or the South... So does the use of a unique style automagickally make them 'Bad Rpers?' No, of course not! Ask any non-newbie warrior about their style of combat, and they'll give you some sort of explanation as to where they got it. On the same note, ask a newbie, and they'll tell you it's the first style they got their hands on, and they'll probably switch it up in the years to come.

Hmm... Yeah, I'm done, and I think I expressed my opinons in a clear and somewhat helpful manner... Wow, that's a first!  :lol:

[Delirium]

As a side note, I would really like to see a "two-handed weapons" skill. I've had a character that used them for RP purposes, but in an actual battle, they would have been slaughtered if they didn't use a fighting style that is backed by the code (i.e. dual wield or shield use). I would imagine that once someone is comfortable and experienced with an etwo'd style, their defense might actually be even better than someone who is being almost purely agressive (dual wielding).

As for the appropriateness of north vs southern armor, I think it's fine the way it is. Chitin and bone are readily available, and it's not like you see most walking around in full plate-mail versions of armor made of chitin. Normally it is one or two heavy pieces in the places that matter most to someone in the heat of battle (torso, head, neck, or wrists) and leather everywhere else. The only thing I might like to see of, as a matter of fact, is more types of "heavy" armor readily available in the North.

If anything I've said is too IC sensitive, slap me and I'll edit.

[Callisto]

I like the concept of northern and southern combat styles.

The problem is you can't just write up a document and say, "Okay, this is how things are." and expect it to work. You need to take into account what the players are using on a regular basis, base the document off what player-characters are doing in order to survive in their chosen areas of the world.

I know you need a written foundation and concept in order to maintain a game such as Armageddon, but some things can and should be left open and allowed to evolve as the game world changes - base the documents on that and update as needed, rather then attempt to set a standard that is impractical to the game world at large.

[Zhaira]

I have removed another post from this thread, after my request to avoid IC details of code mechanics.

I want to stress that it is not my goal to hamper free speech or communication, but please try to keep within posting guidelines; doubly so if it's already been requested to avoid things.  Nobody's in trouble here, and I'm not mad at anyone, but I felt it necessary to make mention of the fact I had to remove another post.  Thanks.

[X-D]

Well, My intention here is not to start an arguement, specialy since I have no idea what was in the removed post, but I have to wonder what it could possibly be that Zhaira is not allowing show, discussion of code mechanics other then the magic system of the game has never to my knowledge been a taboo subject on the GDB, matter of fact, there is two forums devoted to it.

Help, I'm a Newbie!
Are you a new player with questions? Post them here, and they'll be answered as soon as possible. Discovered something nifty about the code that other people might not know, such as using : for emote, or automounting the kank that's hitched to you? Got a special trick for your mud client? Post it here. Please avoid discussions of the magick code unless it's something everyone should know.

Code Discussion
Great place to suggest code ideas, provide feedback on changes, or ask questions.
Moderator Staff

Now, looking through them, I have found threads on pretty much every skill covered in the help files and some that are not, quite a few things on skills in the help files but information that is not there, also, checking the old GDB and the weekly updates there is even information on newer skills and who gets them the usage and a general idea of where they branch from.

So, um, I'm at a complete loss here, unless somebody went off topic and started talking about magick.

Could you honestly see some one saying 'Hmm, I -could- buy that chitin breastplate, or I could charge out into battle naked... I'm a Southerner, so I guess I'll go naked. Yeah, that makes sense.

You take it to an extreme, and I understand why. But you are thinking from a "Ahhh, I'm a wussy Northerner I need to be protected boo hoo" standpoint. The documentation is not there to instill a rigid combat style, it's there to let you know how these cultures view combat. It's just like the documentation saying "Most people, rightfully so, think elves are dirty thieves". It's a summation of the culture.

So going by these documents, a Southerner will utilize their own strength, going for an agressive style, and trying to kill kill kill -before- they get it. The thought is if you kill someone very quickly the less opprotunities they get to hit you. The more bogged down by this ungodly heavy armor you are, the less opprotunities you have to get in and kill them quick. I don't want to hear a RL opinion on this, a person in RL culture thinking of self-preservation. Southern culture should be how it is stated in the documents, not how people think is the better way to get the powerup and win the game.

I like those documents and agree with them wholeheartedly, considering Krrx wrote them and he was in charge of the Byn for a while, and was a big part of its revival. Though I will say, as Teleri already said, Northern hunters aren't really included in this document because it covers "people-fighting", not so much animal fighting.

Another thing I just thought of, Polearms were mentioned. I personally would see polearms as a more Southern style, as I see it, two-handed weapons, especially polearms, are tricky to use in defense. They are meant for big damage, fitting in pretty nicely with the Southern style. For a northerner to fight with a polearm, they would have to learn how to be able to defend with it, and by learning (Since polearm trainers seem to be a bit more rare) they'd be using it in the field and be putting themselves at risk, which doesn't seem a typically Northern thing to do.

[creeper386]

Too sum it up without doing bad... The code doesn't really support the traditional fighting styles per area... Thats why everyone tends to run around with the same basic fighting style, heavier armour and two weapons.

Although there are some variances that fit better with the fighting styles document, it's not really a wide choice, as well as the fighting styles document isn't a solid fact that EVERYONE does it's just common. And it also goes off of what would be easier to use in that inviroment.

I'd support the code supporting more variances in fighting, which would probably have more effect on what you see in game, then a bunch of Bynners getting slaughtered because they tried to support a new armour statement or what not. That wouldn't help but reinforce the current opinion on armour.


Creeper also thinks more roles for in city fighter type character that aren't just standing around all the time would be more of a help. Maybe more PC gladiators that aren't slaves... Or fighting pits or something, less chance of running into something thats going to try to eat you.

[Dracul]

I support creeper's support of the code supporting the style.

[spawnloser]

As a side note, I would really like to see a "two-handed weapons" skill. I've had a character that used them for RP purposes, but in an actual battle, they would have been slaughtered if they didn't use a fighting style that is backed by the code (i.e. dual wield or shield use). I would imagine that once someone is comfortable and experienced with an etwo'd style, their defense might actually be even better than someone who is being almost purely agressive (dual wielding).

While I like the idea, I'm still not so sure about it...people dual wielding aren't necessarily doing so to be purely aggressive.  Keep in mind that the secondary, smaller weapon could be used for parrying almost exclusively.  The issue of style isn't just coded effects...it's about how you emote in combat.  I've played a northerner that used a sword and hatchet.  I roleplayed out that the sword was for attack and the hatchet was for parrying mostly, having that nice little angle to catch weapons with...it's all a matter of how it's played.

[creeper386]

While I like the idea, I'm still not so sure about it...people dual wielding aren't necessarily doing so to be purely aggressive. Keep in mind that the secondary, smaller weapon could be used for parrying almost exclusively. The issue of style isn't just coded effects...it's about how you emote in combat. I've played a northerner that used a sword and hatchet. I roleplayed out that the sword was for attack and the hatchet was for parrying mostly, having that nice little angle to catch weapons with...it's all a matter of how it's played.

Well... I can't go into examples because that'll get into discussing mechanics. But the code tends to support dual wielding being a more aggressive combat style, weapon and shield being a defense style, and just doesn't support one or etwo'd weapons. And it doesn't really do justice to the fighting styles document. Have a character in a combat oriented role, experiment and you'd probably see what I mean. Although different ways aren't completely useless, they aren't nearly good enough to justify what the documents say. Let alone give the ability to really follow them.


Creeper

[Carnage]

http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2115

In a 23-7 vote, people seemed to be in favor of an etwo skill.

[spawnloser]

We already have etwo, but that doesn't mean that there needs to be a skill for it is all I'm saying.  Wielding a weapon is a skill...wielding two effectively is a skill...proper use of a shield is a skill.  A two-handed weapon already has a skill, it's called the weapon skill that you're using to properly wield the weapon in the first place.  Adding another skill to make it better/worse seems redundant to me.

[Callisto]

I have removed another post from this thread, after my request to avoid IC details of code mechanics.

So you want us to avoid the in-character details of the code mechanics? I think someone needs a power nap  :wink:

Really though, what is it you don't want us posting? I'm hard pressed to see how someone could bring magick code into this thread and we've never, as far as I know, had someone storm in and delete posts in the past when we've discussed combat skills and the mechanics behind them. Has something changed or what?

My character stats: Your strength is good, your agility is very good, your wisdom is good, and your endurance is exceptional.

[creeper386]

Really though, what is it you don't want us posting? I'm hard pressed to see how someone could bring magick code into this thread and we've never, as far as I know, had someone storm in and delete posts in the past when we've discussed combat skills and the mechanics behind them. Has something changed or what?

I was wondering the same thing, but honestly it's probably not best to publicly question authority of any kind. The higher ups gave that person their trust, if you really want to say the sort of thing probably best to ask the higher ups instead of posting it on the GDB. Even if your joking it comes acrossed really bad. If there is anything I learned so far, is questioning things like that in front of other people gets the person in charge unhappy, ussually feeling like the person under them is trying to humilate them or something.

Back to the discussion at hand... In my tons of post on one subject per day...

Adding another skill to make it better/worse seems redundant to me.

If this was the case... Then the dual wield skill should be removed. And it should just go off of weapon skill. Dual wielding may be a skill but it seems to me dual wielders get advantages other combat forms don't. And it's pretty obvious other things are at a disadvantage most the time then certain other things. Although I've only been here a month or few over a year, I've yet to see dual wielding go "out of style" I've seen different weapons come strongly and go just as quick, but dual wielding seems to be the main power house over that year among the Pbase... There has to be a reason. Just like there has to be a reason you hardly ever see true warriors in just sandcloth, or even light leather armour.

Sorry if I went too far into mechanics here... But thats about as vague as I can make it and still actually have some sort of discussion.


Creeper

[X-D]

Ok, first the main topic, I do not think etwo needs it's own skill either, for the same reason spawn said. Dual wield on the other hand is the skill of balancing the use of two weapons in combat, a truly different style then the use of a single weapon in any manner (IRL) known as florentine (probly spelled wrong).

Tiny side note, but, how can there be IC (in char) details of code mechanics since code is ooc?

On questioning higher ups, if posts and threads are to be deleted for content, the content should be made known, at least to the point of knowing what is too much.

Me, I'm having a hard time figuring this out, I really cannot think of anything non-magick related that could have been posted on this thread that A: is not spelled out in the help files B: has not been mentioned before in other threads by other players and staff all the way to overlord.

I'd have posted more in replies to other peoples posts, specialy on people north and south using different styles, or on weather dual wield is supported codewise as a more aggressive style, but to do so would use some of the readily available in the help files/past threads ic code mechanics along with some observations.

[Zhaira]

Discussing what forms of weapon usage give specific bonuses in combat, and discussing exactly how armour affects combat, is IC mechanics.  If you say something like, "wearing all chitin gives you a bonus because..." or, "wearing leather is good because..." or "decking yourself out in silt horror is good because..." then you need to re-evaluate what you're saying, and not do it.

If you have problems with me moderating your posts, please feel free to mail mud@ginka.armageddon.org and CC brixius, and I'm sure they would be more than happy to take them up with you.  On the other hand, you could just not post information I have to moderate, and that way, I wouldn't have to do it at all.

If you have issues with me personally, please feel free to leave me a private message or send something to my inbox at zhaira@ginka.armageddon.org, and I would be glad to schedule a meeting for us to discuss our differences and why you feel threatened, as that is not my goal in the slightest.

Thanks,
-Zhaira

[EvilRoeSlade]

Fuck!  Those stats are awesome.

Let me guess.  Ranger?

[spawnloser]

Adding another skill to make it better/worse seems redundant to me.

If this was the case... Then the dual wield skill should be removed. And it should just go off of weapon skill. Dual wielding may be a skill but it seems to me dual wielders get advantages other combat forms don't.

Well, yes, shield users get bonuses to defense that everyone else doesn't.  People using two-handed weapons get a damage bonus that everyone else doesn't (because, if you hadn't noticed, weapons that require two hands are bigger and do more damage).  However, I still don't think that having another skill to tack on to this style could really benefit it.  Just having one skill to train to get better at this style seems like bonus enough for the style, if you ask me.

[JollyGreenGiant]

(because, if you hadn't noticed, weapons that require two hands are bigger and do more damage).

The discussion of two-handed weapons here seems to ignore the small subset of weapons that can be used either one- or two-handed.  Scimitars, bastard swords, and a few others fall squarely into this category, and fighting two-handed with them is a completely different style of fighting than using them one-handed.  I'd consider this to be very similar to using a single one-handed weapon, such as a rapier.

The styles I was considering when reading other posts were kendo and fencing.  Although they use completely different weapons, and kendo is a two-handed style while fencing is a one-handed style, they exhibit a lot of similarity in form - minimal motion to turn aside a strike from an opponent, followed by a riposte.  I also see these styles as being more northern.

I thought for a while trying to figure out some real-world analogues for the northern and southern styles so that they would make more sense to people, and I finally came up with some.

Northern - Romans.  The Roman army was well-armored and made use of heavy, protective shields.  They were extremely effective at fighting defensively, and overcame opponents methodically rather than relying on fast, heavy offense.  They didn't make much use of polearms, instead relying on the combination of short sword and javelin.

Southern - Celts or Huns.  As much as I'd like to use the Huns as an example, they made more use of cavalry, so the example isn't all that good.  The Celts are probably a much closer fit, or really, any culture that made use of woad.  They tended to wear much lighter armor, and were known for fighting offensively, the idea being to simply overwhelm an opponent by battering them into submission quickly.

To push the analogy even farther, look at Roman culture.  The Romans had a society that fostered very sophisticated art, music, architecture, and philosophy, which sounds a lot like Tuluk to me.  The Celts were not nearly as advanced, culturally speaking, and were regarded as barbarians by the Romans.

[Krath]

I have a char that currently switches between Etwo and Dual wielding and you CAN notice the difference in the two. There is no need for a skill of Etwo because the code, as far as I can see, supports it realisticlly.

I think that the anonymous author who started this thread put it most succinctly: "The reasons make sense, but it doesn't seem to fit the game." As far as I was last aware of the status of the game world, I would agree with this observation--as far as PCs and hard-coded NPCs are concerned. To discuss this further, however, there have been two main criticisms in this thread that I would like to address: (1) the fighting styles document does not match what PCs are using, and (2) the fighting styles document does not match what NPCs are using.

Criticism 1 (PCs): some people have voiced the opinion that the fighting styles document should follow what most PCs are using. There are two points I would like to raise to address this criticism.

First, the fighting styles document covers general usage across the entire game world population: PCs, NPCs, and virtual NPCs. In my opinion, therefore, it would be nonsensical to base such a document solely or primarily on what PCs are using. I can well remember one point in time when most PCs used clubs or hammers as weapons; to me, it would be ludicrous to write a fighting styles document claiming that almost every combatant on Zalanthas used clubs or hammers. One might as well write a clothing document stating that most people in the Known World wear armor all the time, because that is what most PCs do.

Second, as some people have mentioned, what most PCs use is simply what their players OOCly believe to be most effective code-wise. In a game focused on IC realism, I think it hardly appropriate to write an IC background document based on the current status of the code; it should be the code that is gradually modified to fit the IC background that the staff envision for the game setting. Obviously, this is not to say that anyone should completely ignore the code and its effects, or to undervalue the hard work of the coders. I am simply giving my opinion that the code should, gradually, be made to match the IC background--and not the other way around.

The fighting styles document tries to capture what most of the world is doing. It is a guide, not a rulebook. It is, of course, up to individual players to decide how their PCs will arm themselves, and I hope that no player will criticize another player OOCly for not following the fighting style document's suggestions.

Criticism 2 (NPCs): some people have noted that many (hard-coded) NPCs do not follow the trends mentioned in the fighting styles document. There are two points I would like to raise to address this criticism.

First, one should bear in mind that a fair proportion of hard-coded NPCs are in the game for a specific IC function, such as guarding a gate, that call for arms and armor that may well differ from the regional norm. (A guard standing in the shade next to a gate, who does not have to run across the sand in the midday heat, can well afford to be assigned heavy armor by his/her employer, regardless of region. Of course, whether the employer would do so depends on his/her IC agenda and other IC considerations.)

Second, although some people might not be aware of it, the fighting styles document was written relatively recently in the history of this game. As such, there were literally thousands of hard-coded NPCs already in the game at that time. To go through the game, checking and updating several thousand NPCs, is a considerable task. I expect that no staff member has gotten around to doing this yet (certainly, I did not, so this is obviously not attempting to lay blame anywhere). The simple fact is that there is a lot of work involved in maintaining and updating this game, and there is a lot that is going to go untended for some time (possibly several real-time years). In my opinion, this is not a sign of laziness or poor organization; it is simply a sign of the vast amount of work to be done and the relatively limited number of people capable and authorized to do the work.

To conclude:

I have two suggestions for players who would like to see the trends in the fighting styles document reflected more in the game world. First, regarding PCs, it is ultimately up to the players themselves as to whether they will follow the suggestions in the document or not. Hopefully, such decisions will be mainly ICly motivated, in a sensible way (e.g., it would probably be advisable for trainee combatants to adopt a more defensive selection in arms and armor, as a general rule). Second, regarding NPCs, I imagine that the staff would welcome feedback through e-mail or the typo command about which NPCs might reasonably be altered or updated. Of course, sending in a request for a change is not a guarantee to the player that the staff will agree with or will implement the change. (In the same way, writing a world background document is no guarantee to the staff that players will necessarily agree with or follow it.)

If there are players who sincerely feel that the fighting styles document is simply 'wrong' (I am thinking mainly of players I have spoken with in the past), I expect that an invitation to write and submit a correct or improved fighting styles document is open. Obviously, as a retired staff member, this is simply my opinion and does not necessarily reflect official policy in this game.

As the author of the fighting styles document, I am very pleased to see that many players have taken the trouble to read it and to try to apply it to improve the game's IC realism and their own OOC enjoyment of the game. I think it is also good that players have not blindly accepted the document as is, but have taken it as a guide, and as a work that is subject to debate. I hope that it has been of more benefit to the playerbase as a whole than it has been of harm. Thank you for reading.

Krrx