There's been a lot of flak about the combat system in Arm. Some of it positive, some of it negative. While I'm inbetween in the issue, I thought it'd be a good idea to make a thread devoted to ideas and improvements to the combat system.
So post away.
I think we should do away with the automated feature where when somebody gets killed by subdue IG, a bunch of posts automagickally crop up complaining that the subdue skill needs to be watered down.
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"I think we should do away with the automated feature where when somebody gets killed by subdue IG, a bunch of posts automagickally crop up complaining that the subdue skill needs to be watered down.
So much for having a discussion board.
I'd like to see a consistancy between npc's actions and whats allowed of PCs. A good example being the 'bug' of sorts with soldiers that can sheath, try to subdue subdue, fail subdue, draw their weapons, attack and get in a bash/kick before you can.
Or with the gith that do a similar thing.
If I knew anything about coding I'd give it a try... but that's what I'd like to see for an improvement :)
In D&D an armed opponent gets a free attack against someone trying to subdue them. If the attack succeeds the subdue attempt fails. Perhaps in Arm there could be degrees of success based off the skill of the subdue and free attack.
Subduer dodges the free attack = subdue has normal chance of success.
Free attack hits doing damage but subdue still has a chance of success.
Free attack kersplats the grappler breaking the attempt.
It's really not easy to grab an aware, armed person against their will without gettng stabbed or slashed or whatever.
I would like to see a longer delay put in place for subdue, both after subduing someone, and after someone breaking free. Especially if that person is unarmed. I don't care how big the HG is, if his hand gets anywhere near me when while I have my swords drawn, he's going to lose his hand.
Edited to include the above post: That is exactly what it should be. If you've got your weapons out, and an unarmed person comes at you, you should get your two free swings (if you have two weapons, one if you've only one) before they have a hope in hell of subduing you.
Well not all subdue attempts are head on. Someone might coming from behind, grabbing at their hands, their neck, whatever. Sideways, leaping at their ankles.
My idea for the day is... it needs to be harder to flee.
I thought about it when I was reading the posts complaining about the flee, subdue/backstab, repeat. Don't get my position wrong because I think there are legitimate circumstances for both. The problem really lies not with twinks, but with the fact that combat always favors weaklings and cowards, and will continue with this obscene mockery of harshness until the system is changed.
If somebodies attacking you, there is no need to test your blade against your foes to see who's more of a hardcase when you can just enter a command that invokes almost no lag, and zigzag out of your attackers sight long before the much more severe lag of the kill wears off.
Flee and kill. Opposite sides of the same coin, no? The lag for both commands should be equal. Not only would this make the backstab-flee conondrum less viable, but it would make combat fast and deadly, as the documentation falsely promises.
Failing that, the flee skill should be harder to use effectively. Perhaps warriors and other hardcases should have a counter skill that can nullify attempts to flee. Or perhaps instead of lag there could be a before delay (which is almost always a better option). Or else the success rate of flee could be more flimsy.
Anyway, I don't think subdue is broken at all. It's flee that needs to be worked on.
Quote from: "Gilvar"Well not all subdue attempts are head on. Someone might coming from behind, grabbing at their hands, their neck, whatever. Sideways, leaping at their ankles.
Then make subdue attempts by hidden characters the only ones that go without a free attack by the victim.
Quote from: "uberjazz"I don't care how big the HG is, if his hand gets anywhere near me when while I have my swords drawn, he's going to lose his hand.
If you're such a hardcase that you can chop off a half-giants hand (which is larger and tougher than your torso) just like that, then you don't need to worry about that half-giant subduing you anyway.
What would be more likely to happen, is that you score a little cut on the half-giants massive, leathery, and probably well-armored hand before he lifts you off the ground and tears your limbs off.
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Quote from: "uberjazz"I don't care how big the HG is, if his hand gets anywhere near me when while I have my swords drawn, he's going to lose his hand.
If you're such a hardcase that you can chop off a half-giants hand (which is larger and tougher than your torso) just like that, then you don't need to worry about that half-giant subduing you anyway.
What would be more likely to happen, is that you score a little cut on the half-giants massive, leathery, and probably well-armored hand before he lifts you off the ground and tears your limbs off.
Bullshit. There's not a HG in the game that has skin like obsidian. And i'm sure my quick little human is fast enough to avoid your big dumb half giant, and run up in between your massive legs to hit you in the massive balls. Thank you very much.
And yes I -do- need to worry about him subduing me, because once subdue lands, my defense means shit, and the HGs monstrous strength will knock me out in one punch.
If HGs can do this easily, then they are godlike, and its just too much for this game to be any fun. They should be slowed -way- down...while carrying all that bulky muscle around, there's no way they're keeping up with a human or elf.
Quote from: "uberjazz"Bullshit. There's not a HG in the game that has skin like obsidian. And i'm sure my quick little human is fast enough to avoid your big dumb half giant, and run up in between your massive legs to hit you in the massive balls. Thank you very much.
Is your entire arguement going to be: My warrior is so bad-ass that not even a half-giant would dare to mess with him? If so, then I won't bother to continue.
Quote from: "uberjazz"And yes I -do- need to worry about him subduing me, because once subdue lands, my defense means shit, and the HGs monstrous strength will knock me out in one punch.
Of course you need to -worry-. That's because your character isn't as badass as you seem to think he is. Compared to a half-giant, few people are.
Quote from: "uberjazz"If HGs can do this easily, then they are godlike, and its just too much for this game to be any fun. They should be slowed -way- down...while carrying all that bulky muscle around, there's no way they're keeping up with a human or elf.
You mean, the game wouldn't be -fair- not fun. And my answer to this is, the game wasn't built to be fair. It was built to be harsh.
There is a reason half-giants are a karma race. That reason is that they don't need weapons to kill you anymore than a sorceror does. Coincidently, that's the same reason that its not a good idea to piss them off.
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Quote from: "uberjazz"Bullshit. There's not a HG in the game that has skin like obsidian. And i'm sure my quick little human is fast enough to avoid your big dumb half giant, and run up in between your massive legs to hit you in the massive balls. Thank you very much.
Is your entire arguement going to be: My warrior is so bad-ass that not even a half-giant would dare to mess with him? If so, then I won't bother to continue.
My argument isn't that my warrior is bad-ass. My warrior is far from it.
My argument is that I don't think its realistic. Did you even read the rest of my post? Half giants are -slow-. Slow slow slow slow slow. And stupid. Slow and stupid and childish. Any quick humanoid (not HGs) with half-decent reflexes should be able to stay out of the way of a big lumbering half-giant.
And excuse me? Make flee suck more? Um...no. Do you have any idea how many people die already? I think that's evidence enough that that would be a bad idea.
I love fighting games, but I hate them for implanting the idea into the general population that just because someone is big they have to be slow and awkward. If you think that a half-giant would not be able to move it's limbs as quickly as a human, try this simple mental excercise that I just made up and I hope it works.
First, imagine a human. Go with whatever gender you'd like. Personally, I'm using a female.
She's holding her arm straight in front of her, and swinging it back and forth as quickly as she can.
Next, imagine a half-giant performing the same action. She likely seems that she's moving slower than the human, right? That's probably hard to argue against, due to the powers of momentum.
Once you super-impose the two images, however, it's clear that the half-giant's fist is moving at a much higher rate. She's moving slower proportionally, but the fact that her range of motion is fifteen feet, rather than five, more than makes up for it.
P.S. My thoughts on flee:
Give it a pre-lag, and add a command called persue, that would allow the opponant to chase the flee'r into the next room. Discuss amongst yourselves.
Quote from: "uberjazz"Did you even read the rest of my post? Half giants are -slow-. Slow slow slow slow slow. And stupid. Slow and stupid and childish. Any quick humanoid (not HGs) with half-decent reflexes should be able to stay out of the way of a big lumbering half-giant.
If that were true, then half-giants couldn't be used for combat at all, let alone trained in it. A low agility can be interpeted in many ways. Slow reflexes, poor hand to eye coordination, even bad vision. But as it happens, the Allanaki government employs legions of them. Perhaps it isn't as easy to stay out of the way of a blood-crazed, charging half-giant as you seem to imagine it is. The code and game-world seem to reflect it. It's no accident that half-giants are coded the way they are. It isn't a bug that needs to be fixed, it's simply another part of the gameworld.
Considering how much muscle a half-giant has, when she finally does manage to lunge, it's going to be as fast as hell. Muscle mass does cause accelerated movement after all, that's why muls and dwarves cause so much damage.
Quote from: "Uberjazz"And excuse me? Make flee suck more? Um...no. Do you have any idea how many people die already? I think that's evidence enough that that would be a bad idea.
Do YOU have any idea how many people die in any given day/week/month? Are you keeping some sort of a census on it? If you are, please share. I'm sure the information would be most fascinating.
The sheer volume of sumitted characters that comes up on the weekly update e-mails is proof enough that people are dying. Don't change flee unless you're ready to change attacks as well.
Complaints about flee highlight a shortcoming of the current system, a relic from the diku codebase. One of the automatic assumptions of the game is that if something attacks you, you attack back. This has lead to the ugly hack that is nosave--a little flag that has cost me at least three characters (twice for forgetting to turn it on, once when I forget to turn it off)
I'd change this first off--you shouldn't start trading blows until you type "kill" or "hit"....until that time you are in "defense" mode, with bonuses to your defensive skills and the ability to use non-combat commands. Kill or hit would default to attacking whoever's attacking you, to make it easier on slow typers.
In many situations this makes sense. If a Templar or militiaman decides to subdue or otherwise attack my character, there's a good chance that he's not going to attack back. If a confused soul accidentally strikes his own kank, the kank is much more likely just to skitter away rather than attack in kind. If a mugger decides he's had enough of a non-combative wimp's stalling, little doubt the wimp won't be punching back.
If there was a (defense mode) command that allowed you to stop dishing out blows, you could then use the movement command in lieu of flee....or the "hide" command to skitter behind some rubble then "backstab" to jump back out at your opponent. But just like the "get" command, there should be an attack of opportunity before you take a non-combat action, like leaving the room. If the AoO hits, there's a chance (maybe based on the guard skill vs. the flee skill) that the defender's actions are interrupted--canceled.
Plus, this means the attacker can go into (defense mode) breaking his end of the combat without fleeing. So if the wimp complies and hands over his coins, the mugger can back off. Or if your kank fails to flee, you can stop yourself from butchering it. Or if the militiaman decides you've had enough of a beating...and so on.
(it occurs to me that spellcasting is another good example of a skill that would be used in defense mode rather than while you are trying to slap someone to death)
Quote from: "number13"If there was a (defense mode) command that allowed you to stop dishing out blows, you could then use the movement command in lieu of flee....or the "hide" command to skitter behind some rubble then "backstab" to jump back out at your opponent. But just like the "get" command, there should be an attack of opportunity before you take a non-combat action, like leaving the room. If the AoO hits, there's a chance (maybe based on the guard skill vs. the flee skill) that the defender's actions are interrupted--canceled.
Most of your post makes sense. But how the hell are you supposed to find a place to hide, and then get out of sight when you're being whacked with a sword?
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Quote from: "number13"If there was a (defense mode) command that allowed you to stop dishing out blows, you could then use the movement command in lieu of flee....or the "hide" command to skitter behind some rubble then "backstab" to jump back out at your opponent. But just like the "get" command, there should be an attack of opportunity before you take a non-combat action, like leaving the room. If the AoO hits, there's a chance (maybe based on the guard skill vs. the flee skill) that the defender's actions are interrupted--canceled.
Most of your post makes sense. But how the hell are you supposed to find a place to hide, and then get out of sight when you're being whacked with a sword?
You flee, spot a large crate, duck behind it, and use the cover to get away from your persuer and hide behind something else. In such a dirty crowded city as 'nak, I'd see lots of angles/stalls/stands/crates/wagons/carts all over the place to make this feasable.
I'd like to see combat in the streets. Maybe I'm just paranoid but I can't imagine ever doing it as a commoner. A half-giant would run in fail subdue, then kill me with five friends. I'm sure this been discussed before and rejected, but thats my wish related to combat.
Rick
Quote from: "uberjazz"The sheer volume of sumitted characters that comes up on the weekly update e-mails is proof enough that people are dying. Don't change flee unless you're ready to change attacks as well.
Yes, people are indeed dying. Thank you for informing me of that.
I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of changing attacks. If you have something in mind, then lets hear it.
I don't understand how you've come to the conclusion that there's some magick threshold that shouldn't be crossed because it would mean people are dying too much. Personally, I rarely die to an NPC unless I foolishly decide to fight to the death. I've never died to a PC who didn't trap me in a room, or catch me on foot. I think that there should be a lot more room for conflict than those limited scenarioes. Also, it would help control backstab-flee abusers. What's there to lose?
Quote from: "uberjazz"You flee, spot a large crate, duck behind it, and use the cover to get away from your persuer and hide behind something else. In such a dirty crowded city as 'nak, I'd see lots of angles/stalls/stands/crates/wagons/carts all over the place to make this feasable.
That would all require putting distance between yourself and your attacker.
Therefore, I am against allowing people to hide while they are being hacked out, without even having to make an effort to escape.
If you want to run one room away and hide, then that's all well and good.
QuoteYou flee, spot a large crate, duck behind it, and use the cover to get away from your persuer and hide behind something else. In such a dirty crowded city as 'nak, I'd see lots of angles/stalls/stands/crates/wagons/carts all over the place to make this feasable.
*nod*
I'm imagining the rooms in the mud as being larger than a 10 foot square. Plenty of action should be able to occur in the same "room". Though I think there should be penalties for trying to hide while someone's in the same room (if there aren't already).
...the AoO handles the case of an attacker stopping you from hiding.
Like this:
Groo wacks you with a sword, ouchies.
>:kicks dirt in %Groo face, then skitters towards some rubble.
>hide
Groo, rubbing dirt out his eyes, says, "Where'd the fecker go?"
More than anything, I would like to see height play a huge role in combat, because it does in real life.
For example - a half-giant can be hit in the head and neck as easily as a halfling. In boxing, Dwarves are incredibly tough and somehow pose a threat to humans, despite the fact that when a Human views a Dwarf in a hood, they are called "The very short figure".
More than anything else, I would like to see the combat code updated to handle height in a realistic fashion.
Gfair, with that statement I can almost forgive you for your inforgivable views on thievery. But of course I can't actually, being inforgivable as they are.
Keep looking over your shoulder.
Quote from: "uberjazz"Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Quote from: "uberjazz"I don't care how big the HG is, if his hand gets anywhere near me when while I have my swords drawn, he's going to lose his hand.
If you're such a hardcase that you can chop off a half-giants hand (which is larger and tougher than your torso) just like that, then you don't need to worry about that half-giant subduing you anyway.
What would be more likely to happen, is that you score a little cut on the half-giants massive, leathery, and probably well-armored hand before he lifts you off the ground and tears your limbs off.
Bullshit. There's not a HG in the game that has skin like obsidian. And i'm sure my quick little human is fast enough to avoid your big dumb half giant, and run up in between your massive legs to hit you in the massive balls. Thank you very much.
And yes I -do- need to worry about him subduing me, because once subdue lands, my defense means shit, and the HGs monstrous strength will knock me out in one punch.
If HGs can do this easily, then they are godlike, and its just too much for this game to be any fun. They should be slowed -way- down...while carrying all that bulky muscle around, there's no way they're keeping up with a human or elf.
Uberbuddy, HG's are monster gods for a reason. What's the point of having a karma class if there are no perks?
Yes, Hg's DO have incredible thickness in their skin. Think Braxat, except not quite as hardy, minus the shell as well.
Hg's don't have to be quick to grab you when their hand is the size of your head. They are not as slow as you think probably...
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Gfair, with that statement I can almost forgive you for your inforgivable views on thievery. But of course I can't actually, being inforgivable as they are.
Keep looking over your shoulder.
I know I'm not the only one who read this and thought "Huh?" Can you explain this more clearly, please?
Half-giants are already quite adequately advantaged by the combat system. Their clumsiness may make it difficult for them to land a blow, but when they do, it certainly counts.
They should not be the subdue machines they are though. If they can't coordinate well enough to even brush the dancing warrior beneath them with a club or their bare hand while trying to strike at their opponent, how are they to wrap that hand round them and seize them with the vast ease they do in game? Escaping a half-giant subdue should be all but impossible, but being caught by one in the first place should be along the same level of likelihood as having the half-giant land a bare-handed strike, perhaps slightly less probable.
There has to be some consistency here.
Quirk
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Quote from: "uberjazz"a half-giants hand (which is larger and tougher than your torso)
Is this remotely true? A half-giant is about twice as tall as a man, so his wrist is twice the diameter of a 6.25 foot man. That is big, but nowhere near a torso.
That is, unless half-giants are barrel-fisted cave trolls.
Quote from: "Quirk"Half-giants are already quite adequately advantaged by the combat system. Their clumsiness may make it difficult for them to land a blow, but when they do, it certainly counts.
They should not be the subdue machines they are though. If they can't coordinate well enough to even brush the dancing warrior beneath them with a club or their bare hand while trying to strike at their opponent, how are they to wrap that hand round them and seize them with the vast ease they do in game? Escaping a half-giant subdue should be all but impossible, but being caught by one in the first place should be along the same level of likelihood as having the half-giant land a bare-handed strike, perhaps slightly less probable.
There has to be some consistency here.
Quirk
New idea thats an old idea.
The ever touted stop code.
I type stop. I propose a truce. Opponent types stop. Fight stops.
Me, I've always been of the opinion that half-giants are not buff ENOUGH in close combat. Yes, they're supposed to be fast, but their low agility reflects other disadvantages. However...this makes them -unbearably- easy to kill unless they're lucky and live a dozen or so days, with training, to get their defensive skills to the point that your every-day, average joe can't thwack them, and their offensive skills to the point that they can hit often enough (from their slowed attacks) for that massive damage to play a major role in combat.
They've got tremendous reach, their sheer mass works like armor (larger vitals, making your smaller weapons make more insignificant wounds, as well as more muscle between you and the more vulnerable parts of the body). He's got serious height advantage. I mean, an elf might be able to get a decent swipe at his head...though it would be hard, in the heat of battle, since it would take a longer weapon (I think, haven't actually done the math.)
Not only that, but think of the sheer -force- of something that big hitting you. I've always toyed with the idea that half-giants should have each of their successful hits have a chance of acting like a bash, knocking you down. I don't think it would be at all strange to see a normal sized human go down from a strong knock from something that big, if it didn't knock them almost a dozen cords anyway.
Half-giants...should be monsters. You -should- be scared of them...if you're planning on fighting them head to head, anyway. And until they get some more advantages to them to reflect their monstrosity in combat, I just couldn't justify taking away their advantages with subdue. It is what -saves- half-giants from people easily attacking them, knowing that they aren't as hard to take down as their size would suggest.
Those people who griped how people weren't scared enough of magickers, and how they needed to be improved against the average fighter...half-giants are in the same boat.
Woot. I just realized, I think this whole thing was off topic, but it got mentioned :P
What I would like to see in armag combat:
Combat styles.
On a primitive level, it'd be cool if you could set how offensive and defensive you were. On a more -advanced- level, it'd be very neat if you could actually get styles that would change things like weapon damages and speed and defense ratings.
For example - you could have an Allanaki style, which would mean that you're -very- defensive, and looking for precise, well timed hits... due to less armour.
Or a northern style, where you go with constant fast, light hits, with an emphasis on parrying rather than dodging.
Now, the BIG one.
Emphasis on strength over agility
Alright, let me explain my argument here. In armag, I have noticed that unless you are AMAZINGLY strong, strength has never been much of an issue. However, I have noticed that in my -many- warrior characters, a high agility has always owned over a high strength. Frankly, I feel this is unrealistic.
For one, if you just look ta people around you... the people you are afraid of are not little quick people. They are big, strong people. I konw some amazingly agile people, but unless they're like 15 year martial artists, the big strong person will destroy them in a fight. I'm 6' and 210 pounds, and I am not intimidated by small, quick people at all. Yet... if armag rules made sense, I would be terrified of them.
To apply this more practically, take a sword. Swords, even thos emade of bone, are heavy. Someone who is light and quick and mildly strong is not going to be able to USE their quickness as much as they could because the sword weighs them down, keeps them in place, slows their shots, and makes their attacks miss morebecause the weight drags you down. Someone who is amazingly strong will be able to get the sword to go -EXACTLY- where he/she wants it, and get it back in time to parry a blow.
Yeah, knives don't weigh you down. Knives are also inferior weapons. People never charged into war with knives for a reason. The idea of the quick guy you can never hit, and keeps on poking you with his weapon doesn't HAPPEN unless the quick guy is an absolute god in combat. Anyways, my point to this: I'd like it if dexterity wasn't OBVIOUSLY the best combat skill. Strength is important, of course... but dexterity is really secondary, if we're dealing with big guys covered in armour swining gigantic lengths of bone.
-Der Comrade
Quote from: "Comrade Canadia"
Anyways, my point to this: I'd like it if dexterity wasn't OBVIOUSLY the best combat skill. Strength is important, of course... but dexterity is really secondary, if we're dealing with big guys covered in armour swining gigantic lengths of bone.
(emphasis mine)
Strength still is more important than you give it credit for.
Two guys in the same armor. One is stronger. His encumberance
is "easily manageable". The other, wearing the same armor,
is "manageable". The encumberance makes a -huge- difference,
in my experience.
Morrolan
QuoteFor one, if you just look ta people around you... the people you are afraid of are not little quick people. They are big, strong people. I konw some amazingly agile people, but unless they're like 15 year martial artists, the big strong person will destroy them in a fight. I'm 6' and 210 pounds, and I am not intimidated by small, quick people at all. Yet... if armag rules made sense, I would be terrified of them.
Fear has -nothing- to do with ability. Neither does intimidation. In fact, your statement has just shown why, someone my size (5'9", 170lbs.) will win more often than not...you underestimate your opponent and make stupid mistakes thinking like that.
Also, so you are stronger than me...big deal if you can't ever land a blow on me.
I've ended up in enough fights with much bigger and stronger people to know that I -will- win as long as I don't let them hit me.
I've had more trouble with people closer to my size because they are simply harder to hit.
Quote
I've ended up in enough fights with much bigger and stronger people to know that I -will- win as long as I don't let them hit me.
I've had more trouble with people closer to my size because they are simply harder to hit.
On the internet, everyone's a ninja.
Seeing how I'm on the internet, I'll pretend I'm a ninja too: yes, I can punch big guys and avoid their blows. Not terribly effective in the end, given that a single punch of a large drunk frat guy can lay me out but a hundred punches from me will just tickle my larger opponent. Just little bruises for my (ex-)girlfriend to kiss when she wanders off with the victor.
(the idea that *anyone* is hard to hit in a fistfight is laughable, of course.)
On armageddon, I had a guy with godlike agility--he could stand toe to toe with citystate uber-guards when he was 1-day old. I also had a character with the same score in strength--the result? He was splattered fairly early in his career by a lone city guard while surrounded by allies helping fight, just a couple of rounds into the combat.
The point is, higher agility characters have an easier time training up their combat skills. If both of these characters had lived to be 20-days old it's possible they'd be equivelent, or the high strength guy might have been even better at combat. The chances of the high agility guy surviving till 20 days is much much higher--seems that way to me anyway.
Any other game I'd called B.S. Since this is a harsh desert world, it might make sense that agility rules the day. If I ever end up with another high agility character, I'll just have to spare a few high str dudes to help carry my stuff.
...double post removed
Quote from: "number13"On armageddon, I had a guy with godlike agility--he could stand toe to toe with citystate uber-guards when he was 1-day old. I also had a character with the same score in strength--the result? He was splattered fairly early in his career by a lone city guard while surrounded by allies helping fight, just a couple of rounds into the combat.
Must have been luck, cause my godlike agility PC was splattered by a single guard within seconds. And older than one day.
Shitty strength, high agility... I've seen the combination effects first hand. I see quite a difference in damage dealt compared to a high strength person. nick, nick, light slash compared to slash, very hard, solid slash at about the same armor level on the body parts in question.
I tend to agree, agility would 'rule' over strength. the perfect warrior on arm would be short, thin and very quick. Strength is a small factor. Agility is not just the ability to dodge, its foot work, the ability to move a weapon into place etc. Sure a pc with low strength wont hit as hard, but the fact they hit twice as often makes up for that.
Half-giants are monsters because its =close combat= and the sheer size of their weapons is going to hit you while your trying to hit the giant. Not because of agility strength, etc its because they wield HUGE weapons and people fight close up.
Arriving late to help discuss improvements in combative coding, I'll start with number13's post. His first one. I like it, fully. If we were to implement defensive stances, it would allow for far more realistic play and senarios.
Someone mentioned hit locations and the oddities in combat regarding that. I agree. It is foolishness for a dwarf to ever hit a half-giant in the head unless that half-giant is unconsious. It is generally foolishness for a dwarf to hit a elf in the head. However, taking into account the length of the arm (which tends to be about 1/3 the body height, and the length of a weapon, it is not foolish to see a dwarf hit a human in the head. For a giant to ever hit anyone shorter than an elf or a very tall human in the head should be slmost automatic. The only reason I say almost is because in the fight, skill will come to play a factor.
On the same note, in another thread dealing with subdue, someone complains about the half-giant subdues. In case noone is aware of this, fighting with the hands is far easier than fighting with a weapon. Therefore, the next time I hear that a half-giant shouldn't be able to almost auto-subdue you, I am going to seriously consider going to lengths to teach you something about it. I don't know how I am going to, but I am. I think you need to look at the situation more closely, and then reconsider you obviously errant opinion concerning the state of the half-giant's abilities. Physics themselves dictate the ability of the half-giant to nearly automatically subdue.
Someone also stated that a half-giant should be able to hit much easier. This I don't agree with. While it is true that a half-giant is nowhere near as clumsy as the code might suggest, a blow from one is far more likely to be seen coming, and thus avoided. If folks can dodge cars, they can dodge a half-giant.
I would like to see combat become more deadly. Currently, it is very unrealistic. Half of the blows inflicted upon folk should kill them or break and shatter armor. However, many folks survive a great number of fights where they should have died because of the way the code is designed. Here is a concrete. If a half-giant hits you in the head, armor or not, as long as they have a weapon, you should fucking die. Your helmet should shatter, you should be knocked out. If a mul slashs you in the head, you should fucking die. It the blow bypasses your armor and causes more than a nick or graze, it should hurt.
Something else that would be interesting to see is non-permenant injuries. If you get hit hard/unspeakably/astoundly/insert-favorite-violent-noun-here with a sword in the neck, you should seriously lose access to half your hitpoints for a good RL day.
The long description injury messages need to be changed. In another thread, I posted some ideas. They seemed well recieved. Currently, the manner in which things are stated are not completely accurate. Given a less subjective description, they will be.
You should be able to subdue in combat. You should risk great injury, but you should be able to try. A half-giant might lose fifty hp or more trying it, but rest assured that, given the laws of physics, a half-giant will typically succeed in his attempted mid-combat subdue attempt.
Given time, I will post here again with a few more ideas that I've had over the past 4 years.
Additionally, it should be noted that the styles of gear in the south are different ICly than in the North. This affects the impact of various stats upon combat as a whole. In the South, agility will rule, but in the North, strength should rule.
I am not certian how the shops reflect the variation in style from the South to the North, but if they do not currently, they should be changed to reflect this correctly.
I would like to see some sort of "awareness" skill or stat. This could change based on how much you fight/train, whether or not you have scan/listen/hunt, some combination of agility/wisdom. Basically, the more you train, the more alert you will be in general. I.e., sitting in a tavern, you still, in the back of your mind, expect someone to jump out from behind the bar and try to stab you with a knife. Something along the lines of:
A attacks B.
B has good awareness at the moment, so gets a message like:
"This person is about to strike at you. Do something." (i.e. a delay to:get off your ass/draw a weapon/flee"
B takes an appropriate action.
Then the fight begins.
Additionally, in a room with like....more than 5 or six PCs/NPCs, combat should definitely be changed. As it is, its just freakin' chaos. I recently was in a situation where there were approximately 15 fighters in one room. The battle spam was awful...I had no idea what was going on...
What I suggest is this:
In a situation where there is a ridiculous amount of people in a room fighting:
a) No more than 2v1 melee combat. Its just...unrealistic.
b) When you are concentrated on fighting one person, you aren't looking around, able to see the whole area. The look command should just show you that you're fighting your target, but also a message along the lines of: "there is a chaotic battle happening here, right now." However, there should be another command that will let you scope out the whole area. Like: "look area".
c) because of idea b), it would be signicantly harder to spot and rescue someone. Which is how large scale battle actually is. There are so many bodies romping around that it should be very difficult to maneuver yourself into a postion whereby you can rescue someone from a match.
d) If you flee during large scale combat, you should just leave combat, and be absorbed into the "there is a chaotic battle happening here" message. So you're still in the room, but your last opponent will have to use the "look area" command to find you, and maneuver their way over to you.
I could go on, but you get the idea I'm sure.
Combat styles, someone brought it up, I'm going to now get out the anti-air craft guns.
This idea is bad. Why? Bruce Lee's theories about fixed positions. Nothing, no action a human does is fixed. We can be trained to do something a certain way every time but it's NEVER actually fixed, we just do our best to make it that way. Where is my point?
Coded combat styles would be fixed without any means of alterations. That's far more unrealistic than simply not having them and letting you rp out how your char is fighting in combat. The open ended way our code currently deals with combat (telling you only if you hit or miss, where and how hard) is better.
If anything I would agree maybe altering your chars dependance might be nice. How much you try to focus on any given skill, for instance. This would make sense, much like when the mercy code went in. I've seen games with combat moods, offensive defensive, but my experience there is those moods don't add anything, they're a waste of time, most people will just pick one and stick to it.
Strength vs agi.
I don't think this is any contest. Muls rule. Case closed.
Half giants.
Killing machines.. Hrm.. I think they're actually where they should be. One, they take hits, two if they hit they destroy you. What more do you want? Theyre bulky, there are some things they probably can't do as well as other people. Most likely when they throw a blow it goes and leaves them opened for a moment. Ever tried catching a chipmunk with your bare hands? Yes, smaller creatures do have an incredible advantage at avoiding the attacks of larger ones. (Using an extreme example)
Another thing, this reminds me. Half giants ARE scary, they just need to live long enough, what you want to make them come out newbie capible of killing EVERYTHING? That's dumb, infact, I think I need the nuclear anti air craft gun for that. But when you get a half giant who'se been around a while, they can take stuff out no one else can. So what is broken here?
Awareness? I think this is a bad idea, too much is going on and you can't expect your char to be constantly vigiliant. Such a skil would detract from npcs an vnpcs that might distract you and give you a hard coded skill in a place that one shouldn't be.
So what does combat need in my opinion? I think we need a wound and damage system. This isn't exactly combat, but anyway, make physicians (people who do the bandage thing) Actually useful.
I also wish it wasn't so obvious that someone was alive or dead. I couldn't tell from a long distance away that the man lying in a pool of blood is lving and just stunned. Actually I couldn't tell it from upclose either, I'd probably have to lean in and check for a faint pulse or a occasional wheezing breath. I've always hated how people finish off their enemies with that one final knowing blow. How did you know he was still alive..? How do you know that you only now finally finished him? I think it should take a little closer scrutiny to find out if someone is alive or not beyond a certain point.
Quote from: "gfair"Is this remotely true? A half-giant is about twice as tall as a man, so his wrist is twice the diameter of a 6.25 foot man. That is big, but nowhere near a torso.
That is, unless half-giants are barrel-fisted cave trolls.
Half-giants are a LOT more muscular and powerful than humans. If a human was magically enlarged to the size of a half-giant, the half-giant could still take him apart with little trouble.
I'm not pulling this out of my ass, either. Next time you're in Allanak, read the description of a generic NPC half-giant soldier.
And yes, I agree that perhaps the subdue-kill deal isn't the best way to handle a half-giants deadliness. But until the code reflects a half-giants superior height, superior natural armor, and superior reach, then a half-giant needs something to make them fearsome.
QuoteThis idea is bad. Why? Bruce Lee's theories about fixed positions. Nothing, no action a human does is fixed. We can be trained to do something a certain way every time but it's NEVER actually fixed, we just do our best to make it that way. Where is my point?
Coded combat styles would be fixed without any means of alterations. That's far more unrealistic than simply not having them and letting you rp out how your char is fighting in combat. The open ended way our code currently deals with combat (telling you only if you hit or miss, where and how hard) is better.
I wouldn't say that. I'd expect Allanaki styles to have faster attacks and harder hits, while Tuluki would slow down other attackers with their elaborate movements and have a defensive edge.
Which could be done one of two ways.
1) style Allanaki
(which would adjust your char to depend more on one thing and less on another)
OR
giving you the option of setting depedancies with a help file that describes the different style.
The automatic number 1 method would write how you do it in stone.
I'm against anything that makes physical actions written in stone if they don't ahve to be. Since we don't currently have figthting styles, I believe they fit in the don't have to catigory.
Quote from: "number13"[...] One of the automatic assumptions of the game is that if something attacks you, you attack back.
I'd change this first off--you shouldn't start trading blows until you type "kill" or "hit"....until that time you are in "defense" mode, with bonuses to your defensive skills and the ability to use non-combat commands. Kill or hit would default to attacking whoever's attacking you, to make it easier on slow typers.
If there was a (defense mode) command that allowed you to stop dishing out blows, you could then use the movement command in lieu of flee....or the "hide" command to skitter behind some rubble then "backstab" to jump back out at your opponent.
Plus, this means the attacker can go into (defense mode) breaking his end of the combat without fleeing. [...]
(it occurs to me that spellcasting is another good example of a skill that would be used in defense mode rather than while you are trying to slap someone to death)
I have selected a few passages from 13's post because I have seen a similar system discussed and implemented elsewhere, and the result was convincing from day #1.
There is a series of combat 'moods' modifying the chances to hit and be hit.
- frenzy -- no defense at all, blind rage.
- ... -- not really watching his back much...
- balanced -- default.
- ... -- rather worried about his health, might score an occasional hit if the opponent leaves an opening...
- defend -- just dodge and parry, don't even try to land a hit.
Being attacked does put the attacked into combat, so he won't continue to arrange the flowers for his beloved while being hacked away.
Please note that it would not allow the attacked to hide while someone else was slashing at him. Someone hitting at you won't go away becaue you pull a towel over your head, no matter how large the place is, he's alreay there, and it'll take more to get away than just ignore him, or not hit back.
Both combattants in defend means that noone is pursuing to attack,
but technically they're still in combat until they end it. (I could imagine a time-out there).
Since most D&D dereived combat systems probably evaluate physical abilities (agility for example) as a chance percentage, the hooks where such a system can go into effect might be already there, easing implementation a lot.
I'd love to see that implemented on Armageddon, it helps immensely especially for the less (or different) combat oriented chars. To me, this is all there'd need to be in 'different combat styles', especially since it helps to define an emoting style that is more in sync with the coded combat.
Quote from: "Quo"
- frenzy -- no defense at all, blind rage.
- ... -- not really watching his back much...
- balanced -- default.
- ... -- rather worried about his health, might score an occasional hit if the opponent leaves an opening...
- defend -- just dodge and parry, don't even try to land a hit.
I've seen it implemented exactly like that before. For the most part the games I've seen that on it doesn't add really at all. Maybe a simplified version with no returning attack.. But if you are in combat it's assumed you're not tring to get killed. Maybe you arn't tring to kill..
But you can adjust that stuff with what equipment you use and how you use it. I don't think it should be a coded thing. I've never seen one of these types of things implemented and make any difference.
I really like combat just the way it is. Sorry I can't add anything constructive, but I just wanted to throw that out.
Personallly I don't have a problem with half-giants being uber subduers. Maybe it's from seeing Dark Sun pics where the races are like all lined up... anyway...
Unless they've got surprise (subduer attacking while hidden), an unarmed person should risk getting hit by an armed opponent. Don't believe me? Get a bat and have a friend try to grapple you. (I am not responsible for the wrestler getting hurt by this experiment.) The result of that hit would then affect the subdue attempt... If the wrestler is awesome and gets inside without getting hit, fine. If they are hit lightly the sudbue has a reduced chance of success. If the attack cleans their clock, it would make the subdue fail, and the wrestler would find themselves engaged with an armed opponent. That's the breaks!
Thoughts?
I'm all for that. Yep. All for it.
Going back to what Gilvar said regarding delays and NPCs...
Does anyone know what the issue is there? Why -don't- NPCs get delayed where PC's do? It must be some manner of coding issue.
It's a problem from anything from the way soldiers are super-duper fast with the sheath, subdue, fail, attack (which is INSANE to watch happen - as a PC soldier, I once saw a soldier sheath weapons, fail a subdue, draw weapons, attack, shout for help, get help from other NPCs who insta-attacked upon entering a room, all in one round of combat - the criminal never had a chance to even swing his weapon, much less draw it - he was dead before I could even assist), to npcs who can be ordered to pilot a wagon (suddenly you're zipping across the world faster than you can imagine).
I'd so much rather see this fixed over seeing half-giants get tooled down. Basically because -everyone- is affected by it. Because you know that raptor you fled from is spamming hunt with no delay, and that gith can throw a spear at you, run in, attack you and disarm you all in one fluid, godlike movement.
SailorMars, precisely.
Quotegfair wrote:
Is this remotely true? A half-giant is about twice as tall as a man, so his wrist is twice the diameter of a 6.25 foot man. That is big, but nowhere near a torso.
That is, unless half-giants are barrel-fisted cave trolls.
Heh? Um, Gfair, A half-giant is around 2.5-3 times as tall as a man and 10-12 times heavier. Call it 15' tall and 1800-2200 lbs, Grizzly bears don't get that big, The Shire drafthorse is around that size.
The wrist of a half-giant would be around 4-6x the thickness of a 6' man, minimum. Say about as thick as the ave human thigh.
And really, Anybody who argues about half-giants, please, go out and find an animal of matching size here on earth and spend some time around it before posting. Most of the large animals on this planet are far from agile, but sheer mass and strength make up for that. Maybe take a hit from a half-giant sized animal, I'm betting if you took a kick from a clydsdale you'd have more respect for the speed and strength of massive animals after you got out of the hospital.
Fact is, the closest earth match for a half-giant is a grizzly or north american brown bear, agil? NO, strong VERY, big, yup. Fast? Yup. Does human with a sword and in full armor have chance against him, NOPE. Oh, he would hit the grizzly once, sure, then the grizzly is going to sweep a paw at him powered by muscles that carry that 1800 pound animal, a paw as big as a human's chest, with 8' of reach at a blinding speed, This paw is able to break the back of a moose in one swipe. Or maybe the grizzly would simply push off with his two massive rear legs jumping forward with both forlegs spread wide (a distance of around 10 feet between paws) Bashing into said human with his full weight and wrapping his forlegs around the human.
Point is, Currently in game, the overall mass strength and size of a half-giant is not reflected, Half-giants currently do hit hard, but the mass of the hit is not reflected, the hit of a half-giant against anything smaller then a mul, should knock the target down, at the very least. Also, the reach and speed of a half-giant is not reflected, A human with a sword has a reach of say, 6-7' While a half-giant with a half-giant sized weapon would have a reach of 12-14' combine that with the muscle and the mass driving the swing and you would find out that the weapon's speed would be much higher then the weapon speed of a human, then take in reach and actual weapon size (Have to figure a half-giant sized warhammer would have a head the size of a barrel) This means not only would it be very hard to get out of the way of a half-giant's swing, but he need not be as accurate anyway since with the size of the weapon he need only swing in the general direction of the target.
Currently, in game, 90% of this is not reflected, half-giants should be easier to hit, and they are, they have low agility so they get fewer swings, this is fine too, But it should actually be easier for them to hit things, It isn't. Tell you the truth, I'd love to see half-giants get some race skills, muls too maybe. A half-giant with an elf subdued should be able to throw that elf at a wall, can't do it. Well, I'm not going to get into everything that should be doable at that size, I'm sure people have thought about them before.
On to the thread topic, I've said it before, combat in arm is fine overall, it just needs some tweeking in specialized areas, some of it has been done, the addition of the two-handed skill for one. I'd also maybe like to see a bit more attention to the racial side of things, I mean, there should be something that a d-elf can do combat wise with them incredible legs and running speed, other then run away, shorter lag on kick maybe, something, dwarves, very low the ground, heavy muscle and reasonably high weight, all the things that should make them hard to bash, yet they are the second easiest race in the game to bash. Anyway, this has become one long run on post, Think I'll just stop here.
The above was I, musta took to long to write and lagged out or something.
Quote from: "UnderSeven"
I also wish it wasn't so obvious that someone was alive or dead. I couldn't tell from a long distance away that the man lying in a pool of blood is lving and just stunned. Actually I couldn't tell it from upclose either, I'd probably have to lean in and check for a faint pulse or a occasional wheezing breath. I've always hated how people finish off their enemies with that one final knowing blow. How did you know he was still alive..? How do you know that you only now finally finished him? I think it should take a little closer scrutiny to find out if someone is alive or not beyond a certain point.
Thats a great idea. The crumpled FORM of the blonde sissy it here. Doesn't tell you one way or the other unless you do some kind of inspection possibly. Physicians can tell really well, others meh so so. The only thing making it a bad idea is that ppl will just keep typing kill sissy, and if it does damage they will know he is not dead. Also they can't look inside to see his gear. But it would be nice if someone people were actually left for dead. Ah well.
X-D, you're right on the money.
I also like the idea of SailorMars with the grapple vs armed thing... but even that would take tweaking vs HGs. An HG, armored, is not going to give a shit that you're weilding a dagger smaller than it's pinky finger, or a longsword half the size of his/her forearm. They know that if they can lay a hand on you, you belong to them. And they also know, if they have a militia 'controller' or something, that if they DONT grab you because they're afraid to get hurt, than Mr. Joe Templar over there is going to instruct them in depth upon the true meaning of pain.
And another thing that freakin trips my trigger is the idea that HGs are absolutely mindless balls of muscle. Many of these immense creatures are bred and trained FROM BIRTH in the ways of combat. Sure, they are not as smart as a human, but if they have been trained, they will know the concept of a feint. They will know how to get around an armed opponent... if you take in the sheer size they have, it's easier to imagine.
A hand as large as your chest is coming at you from the left side, at about the level of your abdomen. You are, most likely, going to react to this by dropping to a defensive back stance and attempting to parry with your piddly wussy sword... or you're going to try to get out of the way. If you attempt to parry, you remain stationary, allowing the hand that is coming down from eight feet above you to easily grasp your head and/or shoulders. If you try to get the hell out of the way, the HG is going to know beforehand that *most likely* you are going to try to hop backwards a few steps, and dart to your right. A place that it could easily reach still without taking a single step.
In my opinion, HGs are not nearly powerful enough with subdue. If you still feel the need to argue, go find yourself some construction equipment with a huge, powered clamp, get yourself in to the clamp, have a buddy in the vehicle tighten it down, and when it really doesn't feel good... try to wrestle free.
I take full responsibility for the removal of anyone dumb enough to do this from the gene pool.
QuoteHalf giants.
Killing machines.. Hrm.. I think they're actually where they should be. One, they take hits, two if they hit they destroy you. What more do you want? Theyre bulky, there are some things they probably can't do as well as other people. Most likely when they throw a blow it goes and leaves them opened for a moment. Ever tried catching a chipmunk with your bare hands? Yes, smaller creatures do have an incredible advantage at avoiding the attacks of larger ones. (Using an extreme example)
Well said.
Quote from: "UnderSeven"Killing machines.. Hrm.. I think they're actually where they should be. One, they take hits, two if they hit they destroy you. What more do you want? Theyre bulky, there are some things they probably can't do as well as other people. Most likely when they throw a blow it goes and leaves them opened for a moment. Ever tried catching a chipmunk with your bare hands? Yes, smaller creatures do have an incredible advantage at avoiding the attacks of larger ones. (Using an extreme example)
Your analogy is flawed and worthless.
If I tried to catch a chipmunk I'd fail because it would see me ten feet away and run up a tree. Trees are rare on Zalanthas, and even in places where they are present, humans generally don't run up them.
If a chipmunk and myself attempted to fight to the death, then believe me, I would kill that chipmunk. If it had a chipmunk-sized dagger, then I would still kill that fucking chipmunk.
As X-D has already detailed, a better analogy would be to pit a human against a grizzly bear dressed in heavy armor.
Evilroeslade beat me to that one.
QuoteIf a chipmunk and myself attempted to fight to the death, then believe me, I would kill that chipmunk. If it had a chipmunk-sized dagger, then I would still kill that fucking chipmunk
I just had a discussion with X-D that kind of readjusted my scales.
For all the time I'm playing, I've had a problem imagining sizes and distances between ic/ooc US/ooc metric measurements.
His excellent hint was to regard a stone like a kilo, and three cords to the meter.
I already liked his grizzly comparision, but through a few pictures he made it a lot more real to me. We agreed that I'd share the links, so here they are...
The first impression he gave me was Andre the giant (http://www.andrethegiant.com/photo19.html), and that guy is
still about 1/3 of the average -big- HG.
But even like this, his hand over a human face is a scaring sight (http://www.ddtdigest.com/features/buchanan/giant.htm)
Now add that HG-s
start at above 3meter and 750kg, and his comparision with the Kodiak bear makes for a scaring impression.
QuoteThe Kodiak bear, or big brown bear, is the largest living member of the Carnivora, sometimes reaching a length of 9 ft (2.7 m), a shoulder height of 4 1/2 ft (140 cm), and a weight of over 1,600 lb (730 kg).
Also keep in mind, A kodiak standing on hind legs fully upright reaches a height of 12-15 feet. Making them a good comparasin to Zalanthas half-giants.
Half-giants are between 120 and 150 inches, according to help half_giant. This is ten to twelve and a half feet. They're smaller than you're all claiming. gfair's contention that their wrists would be twice the diameter seems to make perfect sense in this context, I have no idea where the 4-6 times the thickness came from.
Moreover, grizzly bears wouldn't rank as having poor agility. Half-giants are clumsy and uncoordinated, "slow to move" according to the help files.
They are not insanely thick-skinned either - there's no documentation to suggest so. A blow that would lop off a normal human's head would have a decent attempt at taking off a half-giant's hand if it entered at the right angle. That said, attempting to lop off someone's head with a wood or bone sword is a very different proposition from using a metal one.
I figure that the half-giant's huge ability to swallow damage would let them take a pounding yet still subdue, and that would reflect realism best. They're already combat monsters, I don't know what people are complaining about. I had a half-giant warrior who at 1 day old was a match for tarantulas and similar perils. It takes a lot longer for a human to stand a chance against them.
Quirk
Quote from: "Quirk"They are not insanely thick-skinned either - there's no documentation to suggest so. A blow that would lop off a normal human's head would have a decent attempt at taking off a half-giant's hand if it entered at the right angle.
Perhaps there may be no documentation to support the claim, but there is none to disprove it either. Let's not make a decision until an immortal steps and and resolves that issue.
But, we can still consider this: Braxat and half-giants are closely related. Now one given difference is the fact that braxat have a chitinous shell on their backs. -But-, they do have very thick hides, and can take a lick on their unprotected skin without much harm. Perhaps it's -possible- that half giants may have this same trait?
Quote from: "Forest Junkie"Perhaps there may be no documentation to support the claim, but there is none to disprove it either. Let's not make a decision until an immortal steps and and resolves that issue.
There's no documentation to disprove the notion that Zalanthan elves have hair growing on the soles of their feet, or three lungs, or that their legs are set with backwards-bending knees. I wouldn't give any more credence to those notions either.
Braxats are not related to half-giants, and I've seen no documentation that suggests so (unless you're going to suggest the documentation doesn't disprove it). They are humanoids of a similar size, but there the relationship ends.
Finally, just a little thought experiment on half-giants and subdue. Relative size/mass wise, it's rather like Andre the giant facing off against a child of eleven or twelve. The child however has a sharp weapon which it can use skillfully. I would venture to suggest that although our Andre may overpower the kid, the odds are that he will suffer substantial damage in the process - unless of course Andre is wearing thick armour that the child is not strong enough to pierce.
Quirk
I hate to agree with Quirk, so I'll be sure to toss in a disagreement later on.
I think half giants are unto braxat about as much as gith are unto elves at most. The help files say they have a POSSIBLE (the helpfiles don't even say a confirmed yes) DISTANT relation. So maybe a half giant sorc about three thousand years ago got down with a gurth. The point? If they are related, the hard skin would be the gene that came from the gross beastality crossbreading and not the half giant relation.
Okay, now the Andre the giant thing. A twelve year old? Come on Quirk, way to put an image into my head. We have a pro wrestler against a child who probably never fought a day in his life. Oh yes, and give him something pointy.
Lets even the playing field a little more. The problem with short people, is they're not really fast. They're under developed. In arm the short people (in a half giant's eyes) are well adapted for being fast and getting the fuck out of the way.. and being slippery. I'll buy that a half giant should be able to swallow damage and then grab someone if they don't mind taking hits in the process. But I'll also buy that person would still have a chance to realize what the half giant is up to and get out of the way.
What I'd like to see is this:
Defense play some role and if you try to subdue someone who's fighting you that they get to whack the fuck out of you first.
QuoteHalf-giants are between 120 and 150 inches, according to help half_giant. This is ten to twelve and a half feet. They're smaller than you're all claiming. gfair's contention that their wrists would be twice the diameter seems to make perfect sense in this context, I have no idea where the 4-6 times the thickness came from.
Where did it come from? First there actually is a scientific system to calculate mass and sizes on living things, how much something would need to support given weight, yadda yadaa, I can't find it at the moment, so, I went off the game stats.
Assume 12' feet tall, and 90 tenstone, a tenstone, we will use 25lbs, so, 90 times 25 equals 2,250 lbs. Now, if we assume the ave human at 190 lbs in arm that means that a half-giant is 12 times the weight, 2 times the height, so, I divided the two giving a probable size, then figured out the low end of the half-giant scale in game, wich ended up with 4-6 times.
Which, is acceptable, because as I said, there is actually a system for figuring out the sizes needed for endoskeleyal and exoskeletal animals.
But even without that, Just how thick do you think the bones would have to be to support that kind of mass, how much muscle would be needed to move it easily and still have power left over?
Also, to answer the lopping off of parts, actually, that is mildly hard to do on a man sized animal with a steel sword, change it over to an armored animal 10 times the size of a man and you using a light bone sword, heh.
One reason why the kodiak makes a good subject model for real life comparasin to half-giants, look at a kodiak's neck and tell me if you think you could hack through it in a single swing of a rather light and relativly dull bone sword.
QuoteMoreover, grizzly bears wouldn't rank as having poor agility. Half-giants are clumsy and uncoordinated, "slow to move" according to the help files.
Quirk, your definition of agility must be different or something, don't know if you've ever seen a kodiak in action close up, but they definitly cannot be considered agile, fast and powerful, yes, agil, heh.
And the helpfiles state slow to move, not move slowly, these are two different things, the slow to move means more time till action is taken, not that the action itself takes more time.
Quote from: "Quirk"Half-giants are between 120 and 150 inches, according to help half_giant. This is ten to twelve and a half feet. They're smaller than you're all claiming. gfair's contention that their wrists would be twice the diameter seems to make perfect sense in this context, I have no idea where the 4-6 times the thickness came from.
The average half-giant also weighs between 1,875 and 2,250 pounds. Compared to the average Zalanthian human, which weighs between 150 and 225 pounds. That's a lot of bone and muscle mass for their size. A whole hell of a lot.
Chop off a half-giants head? Even if you could reach it (which you can't!), you'd probably need to hack at the neck ten to twenty times, less if you've got an obsidian sword. If they're wearing a gorget, you can forget the whole thing.
If I was a military commander in Zalanthas, tasked with taking down a combat-ready half-giant, then I would have at least five men going against it, and I would accept that there would be casualties. One person against a half-giant would have to spend too much time dodging to ever manage to get into its massive reach.
Oh, and the whole Princess Bride analogy... its a fucking movie. You can't use as a base for your arguements on realism and what have you.
Safe to say the results of Andre the Giant versus my kid sister with a kitcheon knife may never be known. Here's some other ideas that may be wisdom or folly (you decide). :)
1a) I remember not so long ago the idea of disarm advancing to the point where you could attempt to target the direction in which you disarmed your foes weapon. It was also suggested up/down be added to the potential directions a weapon could fly, in general. I liked both of those ideas. Of course, as with all really nifty skills, you don't want everyone put near and their gortok having them. Figure with avg. Wis such a thing coming into play after 30, 40, 50 days play time, or more.
1b) Changing disarm so if, after the point both people can reverse, instead of having both people try to reverse, just have it work normally. Reverse, reverse, reverse, over and over seems odd. I'd figure two evenly-matched masters just normally disarm/kick/bashing each other, perhaps with a small random chance of a reversal. In other words, taking into account relative skill levels regarding reversals.
2) How about sunder? Right now if you're really strong there's a chance your weapon will shatter. What about if you're really strong, there's a chance you'll SMASH someone's weapon if they parry you. Make weapon type have a role (bludgeoning being the best at breaking things), and even give 2-hand wielders a little plus. Even with both, it would happen -very- infrequently, but sometimes. For those that cast their vote in favor of half-giants being even tougher, don't blame me if this catches on...
3) I liked the idea of turning kick into strike, and changing around the echoes so they didn't imply a hit location. That way you could emote what kind of strike it was, and Hannibal the Anklebiter wouldn't be able to kick half-giants in the head.
4) More degrees of advanced coolness and branching. Even if very minor, it's so damn fun to discover you can do new things. In fact, I'm going to start a new thread for this one... :)
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Chop off a half-giants head? Even if you could reach it (which you can't!), you'd probably need to hack at the neck ten to twenty times, less if you've got an obsidian sword. If they're wearing a gorget, you can forget the whole thing.
While I wouldn't disagree with that point, I would like to remind you that I was talking about lopping off a half-giant's hand, not their head. And yes, even a strong man attempting to do that with a bone sword would likely have a lot of difficulty severing it completely.
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Oh, and the whole Princess Bride analogy... its a fucking movie. You can't use as a base for your arguements on realism and what have you.
It's mentioned purely to bring up the relative size angle. To hear some people talk in here, half-giants are three times the size of humans with torso-sized hands and can just reach over the top and pick people up by their heads. This does not fit with the docs' opinions on their size.
Lastly, nothing in any of the docs suggests that half-giants are fast, merely that they're insanely powerful.
Quirk
Quote from: "Quirk"It's mentioned purely to bring up the relative size angle. To hear some people talk in here, half-giants are three times the size of humans with torso-sized hands and can just reach over the top and pick people up by their heads. This does not fit with the docs' opinions on their size.
Have you ever looked at an NPC half-giant soldier in Allanak? Apparently not. It specifically mentions hands the size of a man's chest. A half-giant has double the height of a human, and roughly ten times the weight. It doesn't seem unreasonable at all to me.
Now, if a human was ten feet tall, they would most likely weigh 600-800 pounds. According to exponential growth, when height increases by a multiple, mass must increase by the proportionate square root. Therefore, a height double the size of a human would suggest a mass four times greater than a human. Half-giants have a HELL OF A LOT of mass that their height wouldn't suggest.
Quote from: "Quirk"Lastly, nothing in any of the docs suggests that half-giants are fast, merely that they're insanely powerful.
The documentation never mentions the laws of physics either, so I can only assume that they are all still in effect. To do the damage they do, a half-giant has to be able to move quickly. There would be a larger time between attacks yes, but when a half-giant is actually attacking, she's doing it fast.
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Now, if a human was ten feet tall, they would most likely weigh 600-800 pounds. According to exponential growth, when height increases by a multiple, mass must increase by the proportionate square root. Therefore, a height double the size of a human would suggest a mass four times greater than a human. Half-giants have a HELL OF A LOT of mass that their height wouldn't suggest.
The cube, not the square root. It's in three dimensions and growing rather than decreasing. That makes for a factor of eight. Andre the Giant was five hundred pounds at seven foot four - scaling up from there to ten feet and keeping similar human proportions would make for a weight of about 1300 pounds. Half-giants are evidently rather broader as well based on that, so a wrist four times thicker may be about right, though six would seem encroaching on excessive - going from four times the thickness to six times would be increasing the cross-sectional area more than twice.
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"The documentation never mentions the laws of physics either, so I can only assume that they are all still in effect. To do the damage they do, a half-giant has to be able to move quickly. There would be a larger time between attacks yes, but when a half-giant is actually attacking, she's doing it fast.
Not really. Their arms are ten times the weight of a human arm, and one would assume the weapons they're using are adjusted similarly (yes, I know that's not how the code works, but it's how things should be). The impact made will be a function of the weight x the speed that weight travels at. The damage they do is less than ten times what a human does. This argues that all that weight is actually travelling at a slower speed than an equivalent human arm movement and, given the length of the half-giant arm, a vastly slower rotational speed.
Quirk
Quote from: "Quirk"Not really. Their arms are ten times the weight of a human arm, and one would assume the weapons they're using are adjusted similarly (yes, I know that's not how the code works, but it's how things should be). The impact made will be a function of the weight x the speed that weight travels at. The damage they do is less than ten times what a human does. This argues that all that weight is actually travelling at a slower speed than an equivalent human arm movement and, given the length of the half-giant arm, a vastly slower rotational speed.
Quirk
You're wrongly assuming that the code is correctly portraying the reality. If a half-giant could do ten times the damage minus the proportion of the reduced speed, it would also serve to reason that they have ten times as many hit points as a human. Right now they have a little less than twice the hit-points of a human, which would suggest they have such a frail mass that they shouldn't be able to stand upright.
But even that's invalid, since humans have too many hit-points and weapons do too little damage when compared to an equivalent real-life scenario.
The point is, you can't take data from the code and pretend it has any realistic implications whatsoever.
I'm not going to argue or read the whole form, but rather I'll tell about the various things in real life I've noticed through EXPERIENCE in the real world of weapon fighting and training.
Kendo - Samurai 2 handed sword fighting with a sharp blade specifically designed for 1 cut 1 kill. Often times, samurai would only use 1 hand for
quick purposes, and the other would be grasping their sheath.
In kendo, 1 cut 1 kill is a saying often used to describe how it's trainers go about fighting.
The sword is designed with only 1 sharp side, but its edge could easily slice through bone with little effort.
Not only swords were used, but polearms consiting of a blade at the top of a rod are used.
In this style of fighting, the object is to acomplish as many cuts as posible on your opponent, but keep your distance as well to avoid certain death.
Since 1 cut could easily kill or perminently disable a person rendering him useless for the rest of his life, distances are of key importance. The first distance to understand is the length of both fighters weapons added together. This distance is the area needed to clear if one was to attack. The next distance is the farthest one can step while still keeping balance. One large step with a slice can clear the distance of the two weapons and reach the opponent with the attackers weapon. The third distance is an average step much smaller than the second distance. When fighting, one of these could mean narowly missing being hit.
More info can be found at: http://www.cam.org/~hiro/skc/english/hypertext/kendo.html
or by making a search on google with the word kendo.
---------------
Swords and Shields - Roman legion fighting/ Greek/ Mediteranian groups even up to scottland and wales - This type of combat utilizes a shield to deflect attacks, a sword is then used to attack by hacking away at opponents and stabbing into weak points in armor.
This type of combat was used all over the mediteranian region.
In typical battle, the shield is utelized to protect the body and wear out the oponent in the process.
The types all range from Roman Legions with great shields used to pretect the whole body from any kind of attack, to the greek hoplite whose light weight enabled the fighter to utilize speed better in their attacks.
This type of fighting is based primarily on who has better lighter armor than the opponent, as well as whose weapon was better for breaking through that armor. The end of the battle occures when either fighter tires to a point where they are unable to defend themselves, a weakness is found in the opponents armor and a quick stab renders them dead, or when emense hacking causes armor to fall apart exposing the body to weapon.
more info can be found at: http://webpages.charter.net/brueggeman/table-of-contents.html or on searches containg: Hoplite, mediteranian war, roman legions, etc. Or general topics about various peoples of the region.
-----------
Fencing- Claymores, rapiers and the like - This type of fighting is primarily a "good mans" fighting due to the amount of rules involved. A Light quick sword is used to parry blows, as well as quickly stab opponents.
Fencing was primarily used inside public areas and never used for waring purposes.
Fencing is quick fast pased and alows it's fighters to obtain balance for other tricks while fighting.
Nimbility and Agility are used to quickly fight in smaller of areas like the streets of cities or on ships, and escape from various certain deaths.
More info can be found through searches on fencing
--------------------
Wood Raiders - Axe fighting in scotland - This type of fighting was commonly used by the woodsmen and hunters in scotland. It was developed into a fighting style when the scots began fighting under braveheart. It's uses were due to the fact that scots weren't trained in fighting, but were rather woodsmen that were skilled with the axe.
Axe fighting requires both muscle, agility, and cordination to penitrate various types of armor.
Axe fighters were usually the larger of men in a croud while the hefty muscle they sported.
Axe fighting is more of a beserking type of fighting due to that it has no rules and was used primarily for large battles in which it's fighters could send several men flying with one swing.
----------------
Anglo Saxorny - Mounted sword fighting - Saxonry was a combination of fencing and sword and shield fighting.
Anglo Saxons used a claymore or form of broadsword while mounted on a horse. This allowed for fighters to travel great distances in short amounts of time, while still fighting in large masses.
Saxonry was popular in the Great Brittian reagion, as well as some of the german nomadic groups that lived around that area. These german nomads weren't called saxons, but followed a similar type of fighting.
Several Middle east areas used similar methods while riding camels in the desert.
-----------------
Knights - Mounted lance fighting - Knights were a major calvery unit used to charge the frontlines and demolish large armies in minimal time.
Knights used several Anglo saxonry methods, but the most popular of weapon was the lance. Lances were long poles able to gore opponents while on horseback.
Knights were developed after the anglo saxon, but were based on them and therefore also used swords when horseback failed.
Look up on Knights for more info
------------------------
There are several other types I'll include, and will be back later today to explain them
This is long enough post as it is lol
After what I have just seen, we either need a way to defend against damage-inflicting armor or it needs to be removed.
Certain wrist-wraps, bracers, gloves and gauntlets can do a huge amount of damage in a short amount of time and there is no defense against them other then when you get lucky enough for them to miss, as near as I can tell.
To me, this seems a little off - if someone can't hit you with a weapon, how are they going to manage to slice you up with a spiked bracer?
I think they have a place in the game, but these objects do 1-5 damage on average, have a quick attack speed regardless of agility and there is no real way to defend against them other then to get lucky and have them fail an offense check. I think it needs to be toned down.
Personally, I don't think bracers and wrist razors that deal damage should exist at all.
I'm no fighter, but I just can't imagine being able to scrape someone with a blade attached to your wrist without throwing yourself horribly off balance and leaving yourself wide open to an attack.
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Personally, I don't think bracers and wrist razors that deal damage should exist at all.
I'm no fighter, but I just can't imagine being able to scrape someone with a blade attached to your wrist without throwing yourself horribly off balance and leaving yourself wide open to an attack.
I agree. Or, if nothing else, there should be a way for those wrist razors to cut the hell out of everyone around you friend or foe when they are worn just as a regular part of the PC's ensemble.
Quote from: "Trenidor"Wood Raiders - Axe fighting in scotland - This type of fighting was commonly used by the woodsmen and hunters in scotland. It was developed into a fighting style when the scots began fighting under braveheart. It's uses were due to the fact that scots weren't trained in fighting, but were rather woodsmen that were skilled with the axe.
Uh, this bears no resemblance to the reality. The Lochaber axe was not developed from woodsman's axes. "Woad raiders" to which I think you're referring were a much earlier Celtic development (about a millenium before the Lochaber axe came into vogue) and specialised in a long slashing sword. "Fighting under Braveheart" is pretty meaningless - there was never anyone popularly known as Braveheart in Scotland, despite the film bearing that name. Wallace and Bruce employed schiltrons of pikemen to great effect, placing far less attention on sword and axe-wielding infantry. Although The Bruce is famous for a particular duel on horseback where, charged by a heavily armoured knight with couched lance, he evaded the lance's point and brought his axe down with such force on the knight's head that he clove helm and skull in two, breaking the haft in the process, axes were not however any noticeably more widespread among the Scots at that point than most of the rest of Europe.
Quote from: "Trenidor"Axe fighting is more of a beserking type of fighting due to that it has no rules and was used primarily for large battles in which it's fighters could send several men flying with one swing.
Eh? No. Just... no.
Quote from: "Trenidor"Anglo Saxorny - Mounted sword fighting - Saxonry was a combination of fencing and sword and shield fighting.
Anglo Saxons used a claymore or form of broadsword while mounted on a horse. This allowed for fighters to travel great distances in short amounts of time, while still fighting in large masses.
This name "Anglo Saxonry" isn't a fighting method. The Angles and Saxons were two tribes who conquered large parts of England and settled there. The claymore is a Scottish weapon and refers to two different types of sword - initially, in the early medieval period, a huge double-handed blade, and latterly in the time of the rapier a basket-hilted broadsword. Broadsword of course is a term which is only really meaningful in the rapier period despite its common bastardisation to describe earlier swords - it referred to blades wider than the slender rapier.
A slightly disgruntled Scotsman
Due to their mass I think of half-giants as being more dwarf-shaped than human-shaped. They are very blocky and muscular, like gigantic hairy dwarves. Eww, gigantic hairy dwarves, now there's an unpleasant image.
That is all.
Angela Christine
Alright, I'm ready to post my second posting...This one hopefully won't be as long.
Spears and Javelins - Spears and javelins were commonly used by throwing them at opponents hurling them long distances to their target.
Spears were used more commonly by the tribes of people living in the Americas. These include but not exclude: Mayans, Aztec, Inca, and several of the smaller less known tribes. Spears were made by sharpened rocks attached to a wood pole.
Spears were used as well as melee fighting weapons by stricking at opponents with both the pole and the spearhead.
Javelins were more commonly used for throwing purposes and with different types of materials. Javelins were used commonly to puncture shielding and other equipment rendering it useless and too heavy to use. Shields and armor were then abandoned due to sheer weight.
-----------
Poles and stalves
Several cultures used the stalf as a weapon, priests, monks, and several other religious men would commonly defend themselves with a simple walking cane.
The origion centered around these traveling preaches of religion that they would not simply kill with a sword or bloodsheading weapon. Since many of them would carry around walking sticks through their travels, they would train to defend themselves with their sticks.
In India (and other places), monks trained (and still train today) in this art. It is supposed to help with meditation while uplifting the body in rigerous phyiscal training.
Many Asianic cultures still use this type of fighting today.
----------
Pikes and the like
Pikes were developed after mounted combat charge became popular.
Pikes were developed to prevent a horseback charge into the frontlines by stopping the riders horse, goring the horse and flinging the rider, or killing the rider from atop the horse.
Pikemen are placed at the frontlines to stop mounted charge.
Pikes contained sharp heads and a very long pole. Due to the length of the pole, pikes were heaving and required two arms to hold them up. (think of firemen holding a firehose)
Due to the sheer weight of the pike, some armies did not supply shields but rather light armor for their pikemen.
-----------------
Morning star, club, mace - Heavy lengths of various materials with spikes and other such protrusions comming of the top end.
The club was more of a bandit oriented weapon used when buying a fancy weapon is out of the question, and making one is hard (trust me, making weapons is EXTREEMLY HARD)
The morning star was a club with spikes at the top of it to puncture armor and break it more easily. Maces were also called by this name, both of them had different versions including the attachment of a chain to the handle, and a spikey ball at the end of the chain.
Beserker in it's use, some people might have trained in it's uses, but it's highly unlikely much time was given into training with a club.
-----------------
Archers - There are three kinds of archers so I'll split them up:
Longbow --- Longbow archers used a very large bow to shoot great distances.
The longbow had long arrows with sharp tips to be sent far into armies.
Longbows were made of durible matieral that was flexible enough to pull.
Aiming was fair for this type of bow, but aiming wasn't required as much when hurling arrows into large armies.
The Crossbow --- Crossbows were compact versions of the bow better able to travel with.
Crossbows used smaller arrows called bolts that were placed in the crossbow and fired at high speeds.
Crossbows were fairly hard to maintain, several parts of the crossbow were made too fragile that they would breakdown easily.
Crossbows also had the disadvantage of loading, it would take a longer time to load a crossbow than an average bow; Crossbowers would have a ring at the top of the bow where a foot is placed to pull back the bowstring and attach it to the fireing mechanism. Due to amount of time it took, crossbows were hard to use in quicker battles.
The Shortbow --- Shortbows were smaller than the longbow, yet had slightly more acuracy than the longbow.
Shortbows were used for smaller distances due to the lesser amount of power they provided.
Shortbows were the quickest bow to use. Shortbowers could fire around 5-6 shots in the amount of time a longbower could shoot 3-4, or a crossbower 1-3.
----------
In large battles, the bowman became a primary unit, due to the range they could provide, bowmen could easily kill several men before the army reached them. As such, cavalry charges became hard, and often times commanders forced mounted warriors to walk with the other men and fight normal battles.
The invention of the pike further disabled riders from charging through enemy lines which they commonly did before its invention.
Before the inventions of strong armors, footmen were the worst off of wariors having to defend themselves from mounted charges and the harsh flights of arrows became tireing for the footman.
With the invention of strong armors, melee fighting became a more popularity and eventually footmen were commonality. Noblemen often fought battles to show their toughness, and as such the sport of swordsmanship became popular among all.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think that covers the basics, it's important to understand the differences between asian and european cultures to better understand why certain things were developed. For instance, crossbows were used in asian areas because of the amount of mountains to travel to go places. It's hard to lug around a bow when you have to travel several mountains before engaging in combat. Also, in asian areas, less armor was used to increase mobility, and instead was replaced by a sharper sword to cut foe in single slice. European culture where traveling was as hard specialized in harder armors and stronger built heavier duty weapons to keep troops alive.
In the tropical/jungle areas as well as the rest of the americas, spears were common hunting weapons, hunters were also the defenders of the tribe, so training was based on who was a better hunter; Since the hunters trained with spears (other weapons as well) there was no need to train with different kinds of weapons.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's my novel, I might as well include an authors note:
Since Zalanthas is a desert planet, I think we should see more commonalities with the middle eastern area, but I also see that culture is an important part of shaping an area, maybe if someone (a storyteller perhaps?) thought about the changes that would come from culture and geography, some more ideas could florish.
Note 2: No where to my knoledge are spiked gloves and other freakish weapons used to fight with; These creations came from later people and their imaginations to form these kind of weapons. If you can prove me wrong, study up into it and explain it, I'd like to hear more about it.
Quote from: "Trenidor"Alright, I'm ready to post my second posting...This one hopefully won't be as long.
Good god how long was your first one?
Quote from: "uberjazz"Good god how long was your first one?
ROFL.
Quote from: "Quirk"Quote from: "Trenidor"Wood Raiders - Axe fighting in scotland - This type of fighting was commonly used by the woodsmen and hunters in scotland. It was developed into a fighting style when the scots began fighting under braveheart. It's uses were due to the fact that scots weren't trained in fighting, but were rather woodsmen that were skilled with the axe.
Uh, this bears no resemblance to the reality. The Lochaber axe was not developed from woodsman's axes. "Woad raiders" to which I think you're referring were a much earlier Celtic development (about a millenium before the Lochaber axe came into vogue) and specialised in a long slashing sword. "Fighting under Braveheart" is pretty meaningless - there was never anyone popularly known as Braveheart in Scotland, despite the film bearing that name. Wallace and Bruce employed schiltrons of pikemen to great effect, placing far less attention on sword and axe-wielding infantry. Although The Bruce is famous for a particular duel on horseback where, charged by a heavily armoured knight with couched lance, he evaded the lance's point and brought his axe down with such force on the knight's head that he clove helm and skull in two, breaking the haft in the process, axes were not however any noticeably more widespread among the Scots at that point than most of the rest of Europe.
Quote from: "Trenidor"Axe fighting is more of a beserking type of fighting due to that it has no rules and was used primarily for large battles in which it's fighters could send several men flying with one swing.
Eh? No. Just... no.
Quote from: "Trenidor"Anglo Saxorny - Mounted sword fighting - Saxonry was a combination of fencing and sword and shield fighting.
Anglo Saxons used a claymore or form of broadsword while mounted on a horse. This allowed for fighters to travel great distances in short amounts of time, while still fighting in large masses.
This name "Anglo Saxonry" isn't a fighting method. The Angles and Saxons were two tribes who conquered large parts of England and settled there. The claymore is a Scottish weapon and refers to two different types of sword - initially, in the early medieval period, a huge double-handed blade, and latterly in the time of the rapier a basket-hilted broadsword. Broadsword of course is a term which is only really meaningful in the rapier period despite its common bastardisation to describe earlier swords - it referred to blades wider than the slender rapier.
A slightly disgruntled Scotsman
Well sorry Quirk...how about you explain it then...
I might have forgoten this stuff, but I belive it was in Great Britian that sword on mount was used to fight the various likes around the island(s)
The only major traces of axe use was around Britain where wood cutters became fighters and they didn't have the nessicary training so they used farming tools and the like: pitchforks, shovels, axes, etc.
I could swear it was Willian Wollace who used this but I could be mistaken.
Quote from: "Trenidor"Well sorry Quirk...how about you explain it then...
I might have forgoten this stuff, but I belive it was in Great Britian that sword on mount was used to fight the various likes around the island(s)
No more than anywhere else in Europe. Knights carried lances as a primary weapon choice for somewhat obvious reasons although a sword was a likely second armament. The sabre-armed cavalry from several hundred years later also packed guns, but they're probably the closest to what you're referring to, and again were widespread throughout Europe.
Quote from: "Trenidor"The only major traces of axe use was around Britain where wood cutters became fighters and they didn't have the nessicary training so they used farming tools and the like: pitchforks, shovels, axes, etc.
I could swear it was Willian Wollace who used this but I could be mistaken.
Eh, not at all. While peasants going to war certainly used farm implements or anything else they could lay their hands on to suffice as weapons, this is again fairly generally true across ancient Europe. Axes were used to some degree among knights especially as armour became too tough for swords to crack, but the heyday of the axe in the British Isles was likely the usage of the famous Lochaber axe.
Quirk
Actually Trenidor, most of the content of your posts is entirely, painfully wrong. Shortbows were not used in warfare at the time of the longbow and crossbow, and I've never heard of them firing faster than the former - a longbowman could fire ten to twelve arrows in a minute. The recurved bow as used by the Mongolian horse archers was comparable in speed and power to a longbow, but that's a recurved bow rather than a shortbow.
The mace and axe became the primary close quarter weapons of the heavily armoured nobility shortly before gunpowder came to dominate the battlefield - by that stage swords were proving inadequate to crack the steel shell. Much time would be devoted to mace and morningstar combat.
Infantry played the major role in historic battles up until the invention of the stirrup. Afterwards they continued to be important although to a somewhat lesser degree - infantry did not tend to be anything like as heavily armoured as the mounted nobles despite your post. Pikes, spears and halberds were common choices as defences against cavalry, although sword and buckler infantry remained superior for infantry on infantry combat (as Machiavelli mentioned).
There are many more places I could pick holes, but I don't have time. I've no idea where you've got most of your information on this - it reads like a mishmash of "Age of Empires" style computer game rules and bits taken from films - but I suggest you do some research on the more serious sites like http://www.thehaca.com/ to firm up your knowledge of what medieval combat actually was like.
Quirk
As someone who does archery I can tell you there is NO ACCURACY DIFFERENCE IN A SHORT BOW AND LONG BOW.
The difference is weight. Where would you see a short bow? On a scout type person or hunter who is doing close quarter shooting or plans to run the hell away very very fast.
Pikes, spears and other long pokey weapons are great for stopping charges as pointed out, at least better than just standing there and swinging at the galloping person before they flatten you, BUT they are also great for standing behind a shield wall and poking at the other guy. Also great for just standing away and poking the other guy. If you look all over the world you'll find different uses. Japanese used them, chinese, native americans, Europeans and not even all for the same uses.
Oh but wait, I had a point.
Instead of seeing how weapons developed in a world unlike Zalathanus (that being our own) Lets try and consider how they might of developed in game instead. Pikes and spears may likely of been used to stop charges, but more likely were developed for hunting, being as zalathanus doesn't see that many historical massive battles.
Maces and clubs and such were probably made as a response to obsidian armor (rare but does exist) try piercing rock with a wooden or bone sword...
Anyway, I hate it when people bring up world history and try to apply it to the game. IT doesn't work, it might have similarities, but ARMAGEDDON IS NOT THE MIDDLE AGES. It is not our past, it is not a representation of our past, it's a tottally and completely and utterly different world.
ALright, here comes my long winded post.
Claymores: You can't fight with them against a swordsman or axeman. You will die quickly, because the time it takes to swing. Claymores were used to wound horses or to knock aside spears, allowing those armed with shorter weapons to dispatch the riders/spearmen.
Maces, Morningstars: Used to crush an enemy's armour. The only problem with them is the reach, they weigh more than a sword, which can be used to strike from a longer distance.
Longswords and broadswords were not easy to cleave armor with, thus thinner, piercing weapons came into play, because they could strike at the armpit/groin, or punch through the armor.
A chained spiked metal head to a mace is not called a mace, nor a morningstar. IT IS A FLAIL!!!! A flail.
In armageddon, I doubt pikes would be used much at all, because of the lances.
Unless war beetles used to be more common, or other types of mounted combat was preferred.
Spears I can see, because they are used for hunting, (think of the benifit of having the distance to poke at H-giants too).
And swords, because with the low level of armor, it would be enough to pierce through. Although macemen would still be used for heavier troops, to take out the elitest armoured foes.
Fleh at the above post. I didn't remember to log in.
And when I said that on Zalanthas, pikes would not be used, I meant that because of the lack of mounted combat.
I hate bloody swords in this game. This is due to the materials that Zalanthans have to work with. Swords would -never- be developed, without metal. Wood, bone and stone are the materials that are available, eh?
Wood - There's no way wood would be able to take an edge useful enough to slice through leather in one stroke. I admit that Zalanthans may have been able to invent a way due to necessity, but the wood would splinter or be deformed in just a few heavy strokes.
Bone - Again, not much of an edge, and dry bone is so very, very fragile (for a weapon material) (especially if it's been carved, exposing the marrow).
Stone - Stone would make a good blade, I must admit. I worked with slate over the summer, and I often used it to cut plastic sheeting when I forgot my exacto knife. I was able to use one piece for a whole day without it getting too dull, most of the time. The problem is, if it's in sword form, it's either going to be very thin and fragile, and would break from a single hit to the side of the blade, or it would be massively heavy. The edge would also quickly break against armor, and the edge would have to be rechipped every couple of fights.
Looking at ancient cultures, all three weapon types that aren't swords make an appearance. Swords only appear once metal becomes ubiquitous. Native Americans are known for their tomahawks, which could evolve into larger axes in a culture like Zalanthas, eh? Mayans made plenty of daggers, and spears and shields were what helped the Zulus rebel. Clubs and hammers are probably the most simple weapons. I can't think of a specific culture that commonly used clubs, but then I'm no anthropologist, and who can't make a club out of a log?
In conclusion, a curse on swords and the fighters (especially hunters) who wield them.
Quote from: "Gorobei"Wood - There's no way wood would be able to take an edge useful enough to slice through leather in one stroke. I admit that Zalanthans may have been able to invent a way due to necessity, but the wood would splinter or be deformed in just a few heavy strokes.
1) That is why there is high probability that wood will shatter in combat, when parried or clashed with another weapon.
2) Perhaps agafari, yypr, baobab, and pymlithe are extremely resilient pieces of wood. Who is to say they resemble their earth counterparts in the least?
Quote from: "Gorobei"
Bone - Again, not much of an edge, and dry bone is so very, very fragile (for a weapon material) (especially if it's been carved, exposing the marrow).
1) Most bone is hardened by fire.
2) Bone weapons can take on -very- fine edges, if cut corretly.
3) Again, bone weapons can be shattered.
For the most part, Trenidor is correct. There are a few things I think I should discuss though:
*Note: Some parts of this skips around and I arranged it several times to better clarify. Also, I'm talking mainly about the area around Isreal all the way up along the coast to around the roman empire, most of this is based on the babalonian region *
In the BC's around the mediteranian, typical combat consisted of two armies running at each other, weapons held and shields raised. The two would meet at some point and kill as many of each other as possible. There wasn't a general strategy to war for comanders, and the major variable for victory and defeat was who had the larger army. On some occations smaller armies could win, but it was highly unlikely for this to occur.
Later, strategies were developed; this development was caused by different circomstances that caused comanders of these armies to win over opposing armies. With the advancement of new stategies came new weapons. At this point, the decicive variable to winning a battle depended largely on who had better trained armies.
Soldiers of this region typically used such equipment as: A breastplate, a sword or other type of weapon, a shield, a helmet, and whatever type of clothing they wore to cover their skin. Some armies could afford to support with more armor, some could only afford less.
When armies were posted at different cities and towns, they had access to different equipment from that city. Armies could sometimes be found with different equipment entirely than another city from the same country.
I'd also like to support Trenidor's idea on a storyteller being assigned to better defining the different type of combat style for each city/house/whatever has a style of combat. Although it is posted in the general information section on arm; I find this to be rather off from what it actually is.
Quote from: "Forest Junkie"can be shattered.
I realize that. All weapons can be shattered. My point is that swords should be breaking all over the place, and at the moment a broken weapon is a rare occurance.
QuoteTo me, this seems a little off - if someone can't hit you with a weapon, how are they going to manage to slice you up with a spiked bracer?
Odd, noone who couldn't hit me with a weapon ever managed to hit me with these types of items...also, I've never had them deal any more than a few points of damage.
Quote from: "Gorobei"Quote from: "Forest Junkie"can be shattered.
I realize that. All weapons can be shattered. My point is that swords should be breaking all over the place, and at the moment a broken weapon is a rare occurance.
Realism or playability my friend. Take your pick.
Quote from: "Gorobei"
In conclusion, a curse on swords and the fighters (especially hunters) who wield them.
Here here! And hunters with armor too.
Realism. There are plenty of weapons to choose from. Pick one that makes sense. Swords = ornaments.
Quote from: "Gorobei"Realism. There are plenty of weapons to choose from. Pick one that makes sense. Swords = ornaments.
Swords=deathbringers.
It's a game, not RL. If the game were "realistic", then it would no longer be a game, but merely a world with the same limitations as Earth. And that's not really cool. Sounds rather boring, actually. =P
A point on swords and arm, At one time metals were far more common, as where metal swords and knives, so it stands to reason that people would still make what they were used to and had combat styles for....at least for a time, personaly I think it is long past time for swords to be fading out, well, except for a few styles that are supposed to have very heavy blades, lik a sappara or any of the toothed swords.
Quote from: "Forest Junkie"Swords=deathbringers.
It's a game, not RL. If the game were "realistic", then it would no longer be a game, but merely a world with the same limitations as Earth. And that's not really cool. Sounds rather boring, actually. =P
This is a game, but it's not Diablo 2. I'll also remind you that it's described as a simulation, and is meant to be realistic (with the addition of magick and alien creatures, of course).
Quote from: "Forest Junkie"Swords=deathbringers.
It's a game, not RL. If the game were "realistic", then it would no longer be a game, but merely a world with the same limitations as Earth. And that's not really cool. Sounds rather boring, actually. =P
Making people use weapons other than swords isn't going to hurt playability, nor will it make the game boring by imposing a RL limitation.
If anything, it would make the game-world more unique. I can't think of any better way to remove Zalanthas from a standard D&D setting than to replace swords with a variety of tribal, exotic weapons as the staple of melee combat.
Personally, after reading Mundane Dwarf's post, I'm never going to use a sword again.
I call to the staff to gradually phase out swords.
Quote from: "Gorobei"Quote from: "Forest Junkie"Swords=deathbringers.
It's a game, not RL. If the game were "realistic", then it would no longer be a game, but merely a world with the same limitations as Earth. And that's not really cool. Sounds rather boring, actually. =P
This is a game, but it's not Diablo 2. I'll also remind you that it's described as a simulation, and is meant to be realistic (with the addition of magick and alien creatures, of course).
Sigh. Then who is to say we can't have swords, if we can have the things you specified above? *Gurgle*, I submit, you win. No more posting over it, practically pointless.
Wow, this sword discussion is pretty flat lame.
Weapons are implements of breaking stuff, ususally people and tehy were all forged with that in mind and they all had a purpose and they're usually all pretty damned good at what they do period.
Quote from: "Forest Junkie"Sigh. Then who is to say we can't have swords, if we can have the things you specified above?
The materials that the swords are made of are governed by the same laws that govern the materials on Earth. Magick is a completely foreign concept, so who knows exactly how it works? As for the alien creatures, there are plenty that wouldn't be able to function in my opinion, but that's a different thread, and the ones that would work simply evolved in a different pattern than Earth creatures.
You forgot a couple materials: chitin and shell.
I can't think of any shelled creatures on earth with shells large enough to make anything bigger than a dagger. Anybody know of shelled terrestrial weapons?
We don't have critters with big enough exoskeletons for chitin to be useful for much of anything around here, so it's hard to speculate on its qualities. I think it would be more springy than bone or rock, not so brittle. I imagine getting a good edge would depend on working with the "grain" of the material.
* * *
As for swords, I can see the problem with long narrow edged weapons like longswords. But where does it end? Are scimitars out too, or does the curve of the blade give it enough strength hold and edge and survive? What about short swords, or long knives?
* * *
Finally, the existance of weapons and objects that are not usually developed in pre-metal cultures could be partially explained by the fact that the Known World is not a pre-metal culture. There is metal working, although it is rare. There is also the possibility that the pre-apocolyptic world was more advanced, there may even have been more metal circulating in the past, for all we know before the world might have been just like the Forgotten Realms back then. ;) Swords could be in use despite the inappropriate materials because they are legacy weapons, they are what the ancients used. The old songs and stories, paintings and tapestries feature swordsmen, so people wanted swords. Since they knew about swords and desired swords, they found ingenious ways to make swords.
AC
When you fight, your stamina should drop.
Quote from: "uberjazz"When you fight, your stamina should drop.
And have a no-lag critter spam hunt/scan/kick/bash the fuck out of my hunter? No thanks.
Quote from: "Forest Junkie"Quote from: "uberjazz"When you fight, your stamina should drop.
And have a no-lag critter spam hunt/scan/kick/bash the fuck out of my hunter? No thanks.
Not drastically...just maybe one or two points every 10 attacks or so.
THANK GOD.
I'm SO glad we're back on track. I read through all 7 frikken pages of Half-giant bullshit and that somewhat interesting but totally worthless sword discussion. Let's stick to basic improvements that are necessary and not impossible to implement.
Four things:
When you are attacked, you should automatically move to defend yourself, but not automatically attack. Defending and attacking are TWO separate things. One is nearly reflex and the other relies on volition. Defense can be automatic, but attacking is a decision that should be left up to me, and how I think my character would react. less automation = better RP | more control for PC = better RP | etc. The PC has so much control in emotes and crafting and everything except combat.
RESPOND TO THIS IDEA HERE:
http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=65754#65754
Creatures should lag. I don't know how the code is applied to PCs for lag, but damnit, no lag is just dumb. Very unbalancing. Why hire a PC guard when you can get a no lag NPC? There's all sorts of horrid implications of no lag creatures that everyone has brought up. Yet it remains unchanged. I take this to mean it's very hard coded, and a change would be very difficult. Yet I see this as a vital to balancing the combat code, maybe the Imms can take it up as a long term project, revitalizing and re-writing the combat code for NPCs. Please please, give it a go. I don't expect it to be fixed tomorrow, but for the long term playability of Arma, it should be changed. This isn't a H&S MUD, but it certainly involves combat with NPCs, thus this should be changed.
RESPOND TO THIS IDEA HERE:
http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=65755#65755
Stamina should drop when fighting. Anytime you EXERT yourself, your stamina should drop because you become TIRED. I was incredibly surprised when I first started playing arma because I didn't lose stamina by fighting. Of course, the disadvantage to this is the PC has so little control over the actual fight. One could easily assume that your character is automatically fighting only enough to not wear himself out, and thus while fighting might drain his stamina, he controls it himself to where it becomes a non-issue. Therefore, I propose that stamina should only be drained in combat once the PLAYER has the option of when to strike with his weapon. Then the player could gauge how many strikes to make and when in reference to his stamina and the need to kill the other guy. But as it stands, having stamina drain you would be absurd with no control.
RESPOND TO THIS IDEA HERE:
http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=65756#65756
I forgot the fourth topic I wanted to post about, but I'm sure it was important, and I'm also sure you would have agreed heartily with it.