Armageddon General Discussion Board

General => General Discussion => Topic started by: House Rising Sun on May 10, 2006, 04:55:23 PM

Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: House Rising Sun on May 10, 2006, 04:55:23 PM
QuoteAlso, note that certain worn objects that occassionally fire off attacks are still not fixed for disengage. We are still discussing what to do about them.

I have a suggestion. Remove their scripts and simply have them give unarmed damage bonuses. They're silly.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: Halaster on May 10, 2006, 04:58:22 PM
Some of us don't think they're silly and really like them, because of what they -add- to combat, which can already be a little stale if you don't emote.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: mansa on May 10, 2006, 05:07:14 PM
I too find them humourous, and it makes me jealous when I don't have them.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: Yang on May 10, 2006, 05:21:32 PM
I like when the gurth smirks at me as it sidesteps my backhand. Someday I'll establish a pub called 'The Smirking Gurth'.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: jmordetsky on May 10, 2006, 05:55:29 PM
I like them for what they are.

Whatever one might say, they are a stragtegic advantage.

That said, I wouldn't care if they went away and we got something in their place like "Fighting Styles".
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: Cale_Knight on May 10, 2006, 06:04:02 PM
What if when you disengaged, those same items gave you a defensive bonus?

You lift your arm and deflect Lord Poopbreath's blow, his weapon scraping along your steel-carved gith-toothed bracer.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: The7DeadlyVenomz on May 10, 2006, 06:07:51 PM
I love these items too, but I think the scripts for them need updating and perhaps expanding.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: Delirium on May 10, 2006, 06:39:21 PM
Quote from: "The7DeadlyVenomz"I think the scripts for them need updating and perhaps expanding.

Agreed.

They're "a little silly" as they stand now.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: Aldiel on May 10, 2006, 06:46:40 PM
They're l33t, but damn, they're so freaking cool.  :D
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: Angela Christine on May 10, 2006, 07:40:50 PM
Perhaps you could just remove them?  Not remove them from the game,  but remove the ones you happen to be wearing.  In combat I think that would make you drop them, which might not always be appropriate, but you can remove them before combat if you see it comming (like when sparring).


I don't see a problem with some "accidental" damage when disengaging.  If you've got spikes and razors strapped to your arms you are lucky that you aren't accidentally cutting people up while you are relaxing in your favorite tavern or simply walking through a crowded room.  You could accidentally cut someone who bumped into you in the street with those things, accidentally nicking someone while you are actively trying to to defend yourself from them seems perfectly logical.


Angela Christine
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: spawnloser on May 10, 2006, 11:40:38 PM
For sparring, I don't see a problem.  Anyone wearing those items that give extra little fun stuff?  Well, you don't go slashing people with the claws and razors and spikes hanging off of you.  It's just not cool.

In a real fight, though...?  I dunno.  Yeah, it should get fixed, but I wouldn't presume to try to think of how.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: Ghost on May 11, 2006, 04:37:58 AM
Make them drain stamina at each successful strike?

I don't know.  I don't like them.
Title: Shouldn't people be emoting in combat?
Post by: gfair on May 11, 2006, 03:50:39 PM
Quote from: "Halaster"Some of us don't think they're silly and really like them, because of what they -add- to combat, which can already be a little stale if you don't emote.

Shouldn't people be emoting in combat? I thought that was one of the more significant thing that fighters had to do? Fighting without emoting seems like an RP deficiency, it's leaves just code, and that makes it seem like the person is only interested in powergaming.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: jmordetsky on May 11, 2006, 04:30:33 PM
Emoting during combat when you are fighting some that might kill you is a good way to get killed.

If I'm fighting something that has a remote chance of beating the crap out of me, the only think I do is type "flee" and wait.
Title: Re: Shouldn't people be emoting in combat?
Post by: Wykydtronn on May 11, 2006, 07:20:24 PM
Quote from: "gfair"
Quote from: "Halaster"Some of us don't think they're silly and really like them, because of what they -add- to combat, which can already be a little stale if you don't emote.

Shouldn't people be emoting in combat? I thought that was one of the more significant thing that fighters had to do? Fighting without emoting seems like an RP deficiency, it's leaves just code, and that makes it seem like the person is only interested in powergaming.

Combat emoting is by far the most clunky looking thing ever.


It either generic boring emotes that might as well be combat spam or its a cool looking emote thats 5 rounds late.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: grog on May 11, 2006, 08:35:45 PM
In fact everytime I have emoted with when fighting something that could kill me, I have died. :)
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: Pale Horse on May 11, 2006, 10:03:29 PM
Quote from: "grog"In fact everytime I have emoted with when fighting something that could kill me, I have died. :)

Not everytime for me, but I lost a fav. character by trying to attempt a quick emote about "getting to his feet and running", but the thing kept bashing me into the next screen every five seconds, until I blacked out and died...
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: spawnloser on May 11, 2006, 10:19:13 PM
Not me.  You see, those combats in which I could get killed so fast that I would be dead before emoting, I did something productive and FLED!

Seriously, people, your character when attacked by a silt horror shouldn't do anything but try to HAUL ASS unless the character has some serious experience.  Don't complain that you tried to emote and died.  Flee, then emote.  I'm sure the staff won't hold it against you.
Title: No free attacks when disengaged
Post by: TheGivingTree on May 12, 2006, 07:24:34 PM
What if someone accidentally killed someone in a spar due to those spikey thingies? o_O

"Alright, you win! I forfeit."

"Good fight, my friend." -stab- "Nooooo!"

Meh, just a worse-case scenario.  :?
Title: Re: Shouldn't people be emoting in combat?
Post by: amoeba on May 12, 2006, 07:30:31 PM
Quote from: "Wykydtronn"Combat emoting is by far the most clunky looking thing ever.


It either generic boring emotes that might as well be combat spam or its a cool looking emote thats 5 rounds late.

Seconded.  I have a hard enough time thinking of one when I am unstressed and have the time to work my fingers, much less when trying to keep myself alive.