Two-handed vs Dual-wield

[chang]

Consider two 1 day warriors:  Warrior A begins training with a two-handed sword whilst Warrior B begins training with two one-handed blades.  Consider now that a 'skill' has the chance to increase in the event of a failure; if they both train over the same period of time and train the same amount will not Warrior B be nearly twice as good as Warrior A?  Since he has twice the amount of 'offense' and 'slashing weapons' failures?

 The first response I imagine is, "Well, Warrior A has skill_two_handed to compensate."  Well, Warrior B has skill_dual_wield as well, and has had twice as many chance to increase that as well.

Thoughts?[/i]

[EvilRoeSlade]

It doesn't work like that.

Whenever you fail at a skill, there is a random chance of it increasing.  Once it increases, then it won't increase again for a set amount of time depending on your wisdom.  Thus, dual wielding will not help you learn faster.  Dual wielding two weapons of the same damage type will not help you learn faster either.  Likewise, having a high agility will not help you learn faster.

[chang]

I see.  I actually knew that but didn't factor it in in my mind.  :?   I'm still convinced there's an advantage however.  Some sort of unpredicted probability thing.  Mutually exclusive and exhaustive events modeled by a binomial distribution or something.

[Morrolan]

The advantage, if there is one (and this seems to make some sense in RP) is that someone wielding two weapons learns two weapon skills at the same time.  The other advantage code-wise seems to be that since parry works off weapon skills (I think) it is easier to hit that Warrior who is expert in swords but has ignored all the other combat skills.  That club, if I am right, slips by his defenses.  This actually makes some sense.

Morrolan

[Tlaloc]

If you think there is an advantage in using dual wield over shield use and two-handed weapons (or any combination therin), you are more than welcome to only use that.

In my opinion, though, you shouldn't be worried about if the code gives certain advantages or disadvantages to fighting styles, but think in IC terms. Is my character someone who would use a polearm? Is my character someone who would use a bastard sword? Is my character someone who would use two short swords or daggers? Does he even use weapons at all?

Those should be your main thoughts, all else is just gravy.

[SailorMars]

In my opinion, though, you shouldn't be worried about if the code gives certain advantages or disadvantages to fighting styles, but think in IC terms. Is my character someone who would use a polearm? Is my character someone who would use a bastard sword? Is my character someone who would use two short swords or daggers? Does he even use weapons at all?

Here here, it's all about StYLe when it comes to weapon choices. Shield and spear might be a good combo for a tactical fighter, rapier and dagger for a finesse fighter, two axes or a Big Ass Sword for a savage style, wooden staff for a zen style -- my wooden stick will fuck you up even though you have two swords! Polearms are good for intimidation factor (perhaps why many city guards go that route), as is a nice big hammer. Etc.

There's great documentation on northern and southern fighting styles around somewhere too that would prolly make for good inspiration.

[chang]

True True.
I recognize that I shouldn't worry about all these things.. but I posted this in the Code Discussions forum just cause.. well.. it was a code discussion.

[Morrolan]

I find that, when these decisions are being made (with new characters) it is often a question of "what weapons can I afford?"

I do not know if that counts as IC decision making, but it will have to do.

[Carnage]

Two warriors were fighting. One was mine, who had exceptional agility (no, not the one that kicked down the door. Another one) and the other I'd assume had the sameish skill level, maybe a bit higher. Dual wielding, my guy was edging out. Then they used etwo before it was even a skill. They hit more often and harder, but I still managed to come out and beat them.

Use what you want. I think of etwo as more offensive and dual wield as defensive/middleground while shield_use is mostly defense.

[Flaming Ocotillo]

Before ETWO became a skill, dual wield seemed to kick its ass pretty bad. There really wasn't much reason to ever ETWO a weapon unless you were forced to by weapon requirements. ETWO made you hit slightly more often, and that's about all I noticed when experimenting with it. The damage increase was either nothing or next to nothing.

Now that ETWO is a skill, it may actually make ETWO have some sort of coded advantage. Or maybe the skill still won't help, I dunno. It's too new to say.

And of course, while some might say "it doens't really matter what the code does for your skills", I can't say that I agree. If your character is defeated by every young swordsman who he encounters, does that mean your character is a great swordsman? If you don't care on the outcome of combat for your character, then how the code treats your skills doesn't matter. But if you -do- care about the outcome of combat for your character, then coded skills really do matter, don't they? You can role-play that you're a great swordsman, but the code will tell you that you aren't so great after you're defeated time and time again. You can also role-play that you're the sorcerer-king of a new city-state, but then the code will tell you there's no city-state rooms or NPCs, and you have no coded magickal powers. If coded combat skills don't matter, then what exactly governs how good a character is in combat, when playing Armageddon MUD

Furthermore, how can we know what code changes need changing if we don't pay mind to the game mechanics? If nobody knows how the code works, then how do we know it needs tweaking or changing? Or is that something best left to the staff to decide, without player input on their observations on the game code and skills?

[Synthesis]

To address the original poster's question:

No, dual-wielding will not cause the person's weapon skill to raise twice as fast, because you don't get any weapon skill benefit from the weapon you're wielding in your second hand.

Anyone who's tried using a weapons style with say, slashing in one hand and piercing in the other will know that, if you suddenly switch to both piercing, you're going to suck with it mightily, if you've never used a piercing weapon in your primary hand.

At least, that's been my personal experience.

[Noah]

Yup

warriors who start out using a sword and dagger and train with only that style (with the dagger always in the off-hand) will suck will daggers for a long, long, long, long time.

[Wintermute]

Yup

warriors who start out using a sword and dagger and train with only that style (with the dagger always in the off-hand) will suck will daggers for a long, long, long, long time.

I never quite understood why this is.  To me, it makes sense to promote different and interesting styles - so why penalize people for going with them?

I suppose there's the argument that using two different styles of weapons is just inherently more difficult, but there are other ways of dealing with that - a straight % penalty to whatever is appropriate, for instance (so it could be overcome with training).

[Angela Christine]

I never quite understood why this is.  To me, it makes sense to promote different and interesting styles - so why penalize people for going with them?

I don't know why either.  However, that doesn't have to stop you.  To me it doesn't make sense to use two large swords, especially when you are just learning to fight using weapons, that is hard to do, which is probably why it isn't a popular style historically.  Primarily using a sword, but having a small blade in your off hand to help with defense, for opportunistic attacks and so you are not left unarmed if you drop or break your sword makes sense to me, so I've had characters use two different weapons despite the code quirks.  

I'm not an idiot or a RP god, sorry, so I try to find a way around code quirks.  Here the easy way around the quirk is to periodically "change hands," durring less critical fights.  That means I am still using a sword and a dagger, but I've told the code that the sword is now my back-up weapon.  I'll improve in using both swords and daggers more slowly than if I focused on one or the other exclusively, but I will improve in both skills rather than just one and that has some compensating advantages.  I don't know if there is one Ultimate Weapon Use Stratagy that is significantly better than all the others, and I don't really care.  Do what you want to do, and find ways to make it work for you.

AC

[Wintermute]

Yes, I do the same actually.  

Though I think I should probably stop doing the whole 'change hands' trick in the middle of combat - that seems a bit jarring and unrealistic while fighting.  I always used to go, em flips his weapons between his hands, or something of the sort, but thinking on that, probably only the most incredibly agile should be able to do that, especially during combat.  Maybe there should be a coded chance to drop one or both items when you're trying to do this (that goes up if the character is engaged in combat), sort of like the code that exists for the give command.

[Dan]

I think he meant that he would turn his body, so that one weapon was in the front and the other was in the back, a primary and secondary weapon. Not that he would miraculously throw two scimitars from hand to hand while in mortal combat with an enemy. He would simply turn his body and change hands es ep to show this.

When I used a shield and sword I would do it all the time, to show that I was bringing my shield up, moving to a defensive stance, then change hands. Note, I wasn't emoting swinging my shield to the other hand, just changing my stance.

[Angela Christine]

Yes, I do the same actually.  

Though I think I should probably stop doing the whole 'change hands' trick in the middle of combat - that seems a bit jarring and unrealistic while fighting.  I always used to go, em flips his weapons between his hands, or something of the sort, but thinking on that, probably only the most incredibly agile should be able to do that, especially during combat.

Code monkey.  :lol:

I don't feel the need to use an emote to explain what I'm doing, because there is no reasonable IC explanation, it is inexplicable.  It is just a damn silly thing to do, ICly.  So I usually ignore it.  It is a code fix to a code quirk, nothing more, the fact that it echos isn't my fault.  Maybe I didn't physically move my left hand weapon to my right hand, while simultaniously moving my right hand weapon to my left hand, like some demented combat juggler.  The code doesn't say left hand and right hand, the code says primary and secondary hand.  So perhaps my dagger stayed in my left hand, but I am now making my left hand my primary focus hand, and paying less attention to my right hand: in that case I've changed what I'm doing with my hands, not what is in my hands.  Change hands, not change hand contents.

I usually try to ignore it when the code is being an ass, unless someone forces me make up an excuse for it.  The code is OOC, it isn't my character's problem.  Have you ever been standing there when a body turns to dust and blows away?  The choices are to get hysterical because something really odd has just happened, or to ignore it and pretend that either the body is still there, or the body wasn't there a moment ago either.  It doesn't make sense that a perfectly intact and fully dressed body would suddenly turn to dust and blow away, so it didn't happen.

I find this works well in real life too, if I can't explain it then it didn't reallly happen.  There is no point in disagreeing with me, because I would consider that inexplicable and simply assume it didn't happen.    Makes things simpler, don't you think?

AC

[spawnloser]

If not in combat, I don't think that should happen, Wintermute...in combat, however, I could see that.

[Wintermute]

I never thought of 'primary' and 'secondary' as being the same hands if switched - that's an interesting idea.  But I think you'd have to assume that everyone on Zalanthas was ambidextrous in order to go with it.  Not that there's anything wrong with that..

[creeper386]

But I think you'd have to assume that everyone on Zalanthas was ambidextrous in order to go with it. Not that there's anything wrong with that..

No, you'd either assume your character thats doing it is ambidextrous or he's just now using his MAIN hand for defense instead of offense or vice versa. It could be they are ambidextrous or they are just switching focuses. Instead of being offensive with their main hand they are being defensive or what not.

And it can certainly still mean you are acctually switching hands. Although I wouldnt' be switching to hands at once... Maybe sheath one, change hands and draw it again, or something if you were showing you were acctually switching hands... As that'd be possible to do that way, instead of just automagickally hand changing weapons.


Creeper

[Wintermute]

No, you'd either assume your character thats doing it is ambidextrous or he's just now using his MAIN hand for defense instead of offense or vice versa.

No but see, the code doesn't work like that.  If you're not switching weapons between hands and you want to use the 'change focus' idea, that means your other hand must be equally as able.  And since everyone gets the same code effect, everyone would have to be ambidextrous.  Or at least have the potential to be, heh.

Anyway, this is starting to get silly.

[creeper386]

Yes, codedly they well act like equals if you think of them as changing focus or shifting your stance. So? That means that you HAVE to act like that? I hardly thing it's that big of a deal. The code doesn't FORCE you to believe one thing or another, or act in one way or another.

You don't have to pay attention to the code constantly.


Creeper

[Wintermute]

That means that you HAVE to act like that? I hardly thing it's that big of a deal. The code doesn't FORCE you to believe one thing or another, or act in one way or another.

Actually, the code does force you to believe one thing or another or act in one way or another quite often.  But anyway, it's not that big of a deal and like I said, slipping into the realm of sillyness.  No need to get your haunches up man, there are better things in the world to get incensed about.

[Gar]

Two handed is a skill?  What if you have a warrior-type and it doesn't appear on your skill list?  Email the mud or wish it up?

[Angela Christine]

Two handed is a skill?  What if you have a warrior-type and it doesn't appear on your skill list?  Email the mud or wish it up?

Everybody should have it, like dual-wield.  If you don't have it I'd suggest changing your objective to something like "I don't have the two-handed skill, please help!" and then wishing up about it.  I don't think all the staff have the ability to change skill sheets, so it could take a while.

AC