Idea: Expanded Stances

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Currently, as far as I can tell, we have only two stances. That's Riposte, and Balanced. I love the idea of stances, so, here's a few ideas regarding more stances.


Balanced: normal combative stance. No prerequisites.
Riposte:  attempt to turn a successful parry into an extra attack. Requires a slashing weapon.
Defend:   attempt to gain a defensive bonus upon a successful block or parry, at the cost of offense. Requires a shield.
Berserk:  attempt to gain an extra attack after making a successful attack, at the cost of defense. Requires a chopping weapon.
Flurry:   attempt to gain speed after making a successful attack. Requires a piercing weapon.
Knockout: attempts to do primarily head and body shots, with reduced damage. Requires a bludgeoning weapon.
Entrench: attempts to raise defense against being trampled or bashed. Requires a shield and piercing weapon.
Dodge:    attempts to raise dodge chance, at the cost of offensive prowess. No prerequisites.
Train:    lowers the strength you apply to your blows by half, and automatically invokes mercy. No prerequisites.

[SpyGuy]

Are you thinking these would be learnable skills like riposte?  Would it cost stamina or have another limiting factor to use?

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

They would function like Riposte does, yes, costing stamina per attempt, or, stamina during use. For instance, I'd do stances like Training, or Dodge, like guarding - a blanket reduction in stamina (instead of stun). For stances that attempt extra attacks, they would require stamina, as Riposte currently does.

I'm assuming that as you get better at the skill, the reduction in how much stamina is used is reduced. If that's not the case, I'd definitely include that into the reimagination of the stance idea. Like guarding and scanning and so on and so forth, you should use less stamina to do things as you get better at doing them.

[SpyGuy]

I'd love to see something like this.  I'd add charge defense to entrench as well.  Maybe a small bonus to fighting mounted opponents if that's even possible.

It'd be fun to have more variety in how you fight.  Just having that one beserker on your side would be great.

[triste]

+1 if only for the proposed "Train" stance, it's always been silly and annoying to see stuff like Muls being prohibited from training with humans because they're too strong. I feel like anyone with enough braincells can hold back enough during training to not murder people, and still train effectively.

And as an obvious side note, Mul rage should nullify any selected stance [or switch your stance to berserk mode or the like], but anyone implementing this would have thought of that.

[CthulhuPakabol]

Personally I think this is an awesome idea, and if it were coupled with echoes produced from people assuming new stances, this could make combat a much more tense and strategic affair than simply typing "kill x" and then throwing in whatever special attacks you have access to/are decently skilled at. Any further differentiation between weapons in fighting styles would certainly be a welcome change to me!

[mansa]

I think the next step is a "defensive" stance.

>defensive
You are no longer attacking back at an opponent


This should be easier as it is already implemented with the 'nosave combat' syntax.  It would be a great addition to the game that in addition to the nosave syntax, you could simply type 'defensive' and it would duplicate the syntax of nosave combat.  Yes, you can make an alias that does the same, but why should complicated syntax be default?
What would be even more fantastic is if it was populated with the %c option in your prompt when you turn it on.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

As it so happens, it was actually nosave combat that led to me thinking about stances. I don't know why I didn't include it ... I'll amend the initial post when I get home.

[Barsook]

I think these stances are awesome and they could have their own skill group along with riposte. The "no No prerequisites" ones could be base skills and the rest branch from those.

[Fernandezj]

I really like the idea since so many people play for the combat.
I don't like the requirement of weapon types - at least if thats ALL were doing with stances.

I would rather see generic, weaponless stances, and maybe nuance:

Code Select Expand


Offensive Stances:
Berserk //Severe penalties to defense, major offensive bonuses
+++ Offense
--- Defense
Require a specific weapon type (maybe chop, bludgeon)

Aggressive //Drop some defense for offense
++ Offense
-- Defense

Neutral Stances
Standard //Normal, just your skills and inherent off/def
   No modifications

Defensive Stances
Protective //This would be like the sparring stance
++ Defense
-- Offense

Shieldwall //You barely attack
+++ Defense
--- Offense
Require a shield


Then maybe some sort of regional specific to align fighting styles.

Code Select Expand


"Scorpion Stance" //Or something equally southern
+ Offense when dual wielding
+ Defense when dual wielding

"Gurth Stance" //Or something equally northern
+ Defense with a shield
+ Offense with a shield


This also opens the door for clan specific stances, which would add some benefit to receiving "years of training in the Byn", or a militia education, elf-tribal tactics, or Kuraci desert ops. I dont know enough about the backgrounds of all these groups to suggest what they'd do.

[Barsook]

That I like also.

[Kyviantre]

Train:    lowers the strength you apply to your blows by half, and automatically invokes mercy. No prerequisites.

Gimme please!

[Halcyon]

Train:    lowers the strength you apply to your blows by half, and automatically invokes mercy. No prerequisites.

Gimme please!

Please, please no.

One of the only advantages of playing a high str character is the disadvantage in getting perfect training.

Please dont remove this weakness.   Right now there is an necessity and value in playing the one wis/agi fighter in a training group.  (again) Please dont add options that reduce the list of interesting characters to be played.

[Kyviantre]

Perhaps I should have been more specific.  I don't care about mercy.  But your big brute of a warrior, should be able to safely spar with the wet-behind-the-ears rookie without pummeling them into the dust.  Sure, you're going to dodge their hits, but there is a thing in LARP called 'pulling your blows', where you don't thwack the monsters with full force, but go for 'touches' (because they are humans in goblin costumes, and bruise!).

Being able for the uber-warrior to be skilled enough to know how hard to hit someone...and to not go full-out on someone they know is just learning, would be wonderful for RP.

Limit skill gains (if you're 'training', don't get gains, if you're being trained, 75%?), but it allows you to emote, and RP around going "Tighten up that footwork rookie", and so on, rather than it be 5 rounds and done.

[SpyGuy]

I agree that train would shore up just about the only weakness high strength has, that their training fights end too quickly. But it just makes sense. 

Right now there are ways to train more safely.  Nosave combat, using different styles like not twohanded, etc. but if there's much of a power difference a high strength character will just destroy a rookie.  Not nearly as big of a problem for characters with lower strength.

[rinthrat]

I agree that train would shore up just about the only weakness high strength has, that their training fights end too quickly. But it just makes sense. 

Right now there are ways to train more safely.  Nosave combat, using different styles like not twohanded, etc. but if there's much of a power difference a high strength character will just destroy a rookie.  Not nearly as big of a problem for characters with lower strength.

I actually like that it has this downside. It slows down skill progression for high-strength characters and provides a tiny bit of balance.

[Jihelu]

It's silly to me there is absolutely no way of holding back  in fights that isn't outright never attacking them.

[whatislove]

I'm down for these, since it may make combat much more intuitive , and much less 'im a 60 day enforcer, get rekt by my master bash'.

Hopefully would give a good new breath to the combative side of the world, even if the bonuses are small, it could help with feeling a bit more in control of combat.

[Veselka]

Honestly, if the bonuses / minuses weren't that extreme, but it changed some of the flavor of combat, provided more 'moves', it would be pretty fun.

Combat as it is (particularly between experienced combatants) is a numbers game, rather than a skill game. It'd be cool if fighters could develop separate styles they could train and match against each other.

So, a master 'duelist', one who fights with one weapon and no shield, gains a bonus to parry and riposte, with a minus to offense and damage.

A master two-weapon fighter gains speed in attacking (regardless of agility), a small bonus to offense, and a minus to defense and parry.

A master two-handed fighter gains a bonus to damage and parry, but a reduction to offense and defense.

Etc etc. It'd just be nice if the +/- of using different weapons OUTWEIGHED the bonus of using a bludgeoning weapon, because stun damage.

As pointed out above, having more nuance in combat (Which does appear to be a large part of this game) would be a welcome addition!

[X-D]

I find it funny that you say two weapons -parry when IRL and in game two weapons is to get a parry bonus.

While a two handed weapon is to get offense, damage and parry bonus as well classically.

Though, I am not against the idea itself. Preferred over OP in fact.

[Veselka]

I find it funny that you say two weapons -parry when IRL and in game two weapons is to get a parry bonus.

While a two handed weapon is to get offense, damage and parry bonus as well classically.

Though, I am not against the idea itself. Preferred over OP in fact.

Sure, I was just trying to think of a minus that made sense to two weapon fighting. Increased speed and increased parry seems a bit OP. Maybe less damage.

I think it'd be cool if stances were in fact skills, and you could pop them from using the weapon in that style enough, or if it was taught to you. That way you can't just interchange them at will (unless you're a baller fighter and learned them all).

[Veselka]

Also, while we're on the idea of different stances, it'd be cool if there was a 'shield wall' skill or something for multiple shield wielders to use, if they are following you.

>shieldwall target

You form a shield wall with <target>.

+++ Defense from ranged weapons
++ Defense added to the leader
+ Defense added to others in shield wall
+ Defense against Bash

--- Minus Offense/Damage against Melee Attackers
--- Minus Parry against Melee Attackers / Ranged Weapons
-- Long Delay
- Large Damage/Hack/Bash can break a shield wall
- One person leaving the room/moving breaks the shield wall for all in the chain.
- Cannot do shield wall while mounted or hitched to a mount.

The higher the leader's skill, the less time it takes to form it, and better chance of it not breaking.



Maybe another skill, too: Formation

Leader issues the formation to followers. >Formation me person.1 person.2 person.3

>You settle into formation.

Formation creates a guarding order from top to bottom (1st to Last) Higher chance of attacks going to the first person in formation. Attacks directed at followers automatically incur rescue attempts from the people above them in formation. High damage/Bash breaks formation.

Plus, it'd be even cooler if they're all in the same clan, it forms a 'unit'.

Just some #showerthoughts

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I like the idea of weapon-specific stances, like Riposte for swords, or Berserk for axes, being branched off of weapon skills. I like that a lot.

I do think there should be some basic stances that everyone has access to, though, like normal, defensive, offensive, and training.

But creating a cool tree for most stances, branching off of weapon skills or other combat skills, sounds neat.

[Veselka]

I like the idea of weapon-specific stances, like Riposte for swords, or Berserk for axes, being branched off of weapon skills. I like that a lot.

I do think there should be some basic stances that everyone has access to, though, like normal, defensive, offensive, and training.

But creating a cool tree for most stances, branching off of weapon skills or other combat skills, sounds neat.

Tying 'Teach' into it would be cool as well (IMHO). It's always been an underutilized part of the code that is marginally cool at best.

Part of what makes a mentor appealing is, well, they know more than you! And you can benefit from their tutelage!

Like the funny thing to me is we don't have Reading and Writing, and as Brokkr pointed out previously, it makes becoming a 'genius' at crafting pretty difficult, in his opinion.

Yet! We have self-made genius sword swingers the world over, because they teach themselves simply through trial and error.

The missing link here (IMHO) is teachers. Salarr has the world's greatest teachers. The T'zai Byn has some pretty good teachers. House Tor has some pretty stellar teachers.

Something to chew on.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Oh shit. If Tor could ... oh shit. That's why you visit the Academy and pay to become a student!

[Brokkr]

Like the funny thing to me is we don't have Reading and Writing, and as Brokkr pointed out previously, it makes becoming a 'genius' at crafting pretty difficult, in his opinion.

If that was your takeaway, I don't think you got the full picture.  There isn't reading and writing....as substitutes for on hands/master taught level learning, which also isn't available for the most part outside GMH.

[Veselka]

Like the funny thing to me is we don't have Reading and Writing, and as Brokkr pointed out previously, it makes becoming a 'genius' at crafting pretty difficult, in his opinion.

If that was your takeaway, I don't think you got the full picture.  There isn't reading and writing....as substitutes for on hands/master taught level learning, which also isn't available for the most part outside GMH.

Right -- I suppose I'm saying trial and error learning only goes so far when 'mastering' any skill. The missing part of the equation is (or should be considered) teachers of greater knowledge than most Commoners, where GMH are concerned. It's the only thing that makes sense as to why a nobody Commoner can suddenly have access to archaic designs -- there is someone in the House who knows about them, and teaches the formerly nobody Commoner what they are. Particularly in a society where reading and writing is outlawed for most Commoners, the sensible way of passing on knowledge is through oral tradition and teachers.

Similarly, where swordplay is concerned, trial and error learning is likely very valuable, but you don't suddenly learn how to turn your wrist just so when being attacked at this angle, etc. It's more of a survival learning than actual 'learning' of the skill. You avoid dying to a Carru so many times, and you know how to adjust for certain attacks it makes. But does that make you a Master at Swordplay? I suppose by Zalanthan standards, yes, but a more realistic (or at least sensible) approach would be through a mentor or teacher.

Again, just #showerthoughts, not stating my opinion as fact.

[Riev]

I would +1 the idea of Basic Stances that anyone can have/be taught/etc and the domain of fighters (or maybe heavy combat itself) is that they have access to "advanced stances". Most classes can be taught to use weapons, and to a very decent degree. Getting Journeyman weapons on a crafter is spectacular, considering they used to not get weapon skills at all.

I don't know about the branching or the balancing, or how to determine your skill gains based on your stances, but the base idea is very intriguing.

[gotdamnmiracle]

I am confident we won't see anything like this.

But in reality, all of the combat skills could be made into stances where it's not immediate when you proc it and it "looks for an opening", either quicker or slower based on your offense against their defense. Starting combat from stealth would be an immediate success, and thus would be useful for things like backstab and sap, while also allowing them to be used more than once in combat if very infrequently.

The benefit of this is that, like riposte, you can see them entering the stance. So if you decide you don't want that dwarf to bash you then you have the opportunity to flee. The downside is the possibility of balance issues.