I'm quite new here, so I don't feel comfortable making sugestions about the code... but I have one quick thought that I would like to share... I've just read trough some thread about spamming disarm skill in combat.
So a quick sugestion would be:
Why don't make a disarm a passive skill? For example like:
everytime your opponent parries you get a (small) chance (based on your skill) of disarming him...
Well certainly would remove problem of spamming right away...
Also it would make picking weapon by attacker harder...
Feel free to kill me :D
That would be an improvement.
Agreed.
Sounds like a plan to me...only problem is it takes combat out of the players hands even more.
Which...i guess is fine by me.
Indeed a good idea, but in sparring circles sometimes, you wouldn't want to disarm your opponent...
A toggle?
I had to really sit and think for a minute about this idea. Disarming an opponent seems like it would be a combination of both opportunity and deliberate action, but that can still work with the suggestion above. It would work sort of like listen. Here's what I suggest -
> disarm bandy
You begin looking for an opportunity to disarm the bandy-legged gith.
Disarm is now toggled on for a period of time based on your skill, and you have some 'after' delay. You can turn disarm back off before it runs out (say, for example, your disarms are getting reversed) by typing 'disarm off'.
So combat happens, and while disarm is on, any time the bandy-legged gith parries one of your attacks, there's a chance based on your skill that you'll disarm him (or have your disarm reversed, etc.)
If combat stops, your disarm skill turns off automatically.
Disarm is a powerful but dangerous skill.. I wouldn't leave it out of control, like an automated one..
I like JGG version well enough, it would be an improvement over the current method.
I'd be game for passive disarm skill, and I support the particular method The Giant proposed.
I agree with JGG's proposition...And it is true that Disarm is a truly dangerous skill, I think one of the most important ones in combat, as it can end a fight quicker than that dasterdly circle kick...BUT...It is also easily the most spammed attack outside of kick..And by making it a passive toggle, not only is it more realistic, but also harder to train, making a true master of disarm a pimp in battle.
I disagree. Disarm should be how it is. A quick attack that attempts to disarm someone. The code is left ambiguous so it could be a number of different ways, not nescessarily on a parry. You could suddenly slash out at their hands, try to knock it out from below, etc.
There is really no reason for a passive skill. If you want to play as 'looking for an opening' then do it, and just don't do any other combat-spam commands until you feel you found an opening and try.
This also sets a precedent for making other skills 'passive' like bash.
>bash on
>You begin looking for a good opprotunity to rush in and knock your opponent down.
Thats how I feel, I think the disarm skill is fine and typically suggestions like this are only made so that you don't have to type the command or get in a different command while you have your auto-disarming on.
Oh, sure, leave it how it is, Yup, a peak of realism that is, BAH.
First, if the opponent does not have the skill, they have no defense, a player with the skill can disarm them 25 times in a row with no penalty at all. Also, Size and strength are not taken into account with the skill either.
And I've seen that happen by the way, by high karma players too.
Nothing helps kill any sort of realism like the way the disarm skill currently works...unless you think action movies are real.
I've seen a single warrior go against 4 halflings and send all 8+ weapons flying...I actually logged off minutes later because I was too annoyed to continue playing that day.
But one that is even more fun is when a half-giant using a half-giant only weapon, gets disarmed by a dagger wielding halfling, Yup, the dagger wielding halfling knocks that maul from your hands, a maul that is bigger then the halfling, being wielded by a being who can carry a kank around with ease.
Oh, and by the way, the help files state wearing gloves makes you easier to disarm. Thats silly too, if anything it should have no effect or make you harder to disarm, specialy when you consider that the most common way to get somebodies weapon out of their hand is to strike the hand, IE armored hand good.
Current problems I see with disarm.
#1 The delay is too short, and I think it should be a delay before and after skill, being a skill that (IRL) needs a setup.
#2 It is simply to easy to do repeatadly to somebody in a single fight. I think each attempt on the same person should have a higher diffaculty, maybe based on the combined wis and AGI scores of the person being disarmed, also, make it a timer that wears off after an IC day or so.
#3 It is too easy to pick up your weapon without the other person getting a free attack.
I do like a toggled skill though, specialy if I'm playing a warrior, leave me more time for emotes:)
QuoteFirst, if the opponent does not have the skill, they have no defense, a player with the skill can disarm them 25 times in a row with no penalty at all.
As it should be.
Noone other than another warrior should be able to stand up to a warrior in a fight.
Half-giants being the exception to many things in the game, because the code does not support them realistically.
*sniff* Dammit! My merchant has no defense against disarm...that's bullshit! :roll:
*sniff* Crap! My warrior has no defense against people hiding...it's not fair! He never gets to see them! Maybe they should make hide a passive skill...you know toggle it on...and when someone looks at you it has a chance of going off... :roll:
I'm with Gilvar, it's perfectly fine as it is.
QuoteI think each attempt on the same person should have a higher diffaculty, maybe based on the combined wis and AGI scores of the person being disarmed, also, make it a timer that wears off after an IC day or so.
Or more realistically...a lower difficulty...since I'm sure it puts alot of strain on them and wears them down to keep trying to fend off your attempts at disarming them.
Again, people need to quit whining about disarm...it's a warriors skill...your not a warrior and you can't defend against it in a fight? Tough shit.
SNICKER...mighty funny.
No, warriors are the best fighters, and yes they should be, nobody has said otherwise.
Noboby is whining about it.
What somebody may be complaining about is a VERY unrealistic skill, not that it exists, just its current form of existance.
First anon, give me a break, compairing a skill like hide or scan to a combat skill that turns anybody into a merchant, and can be done 20 times in a row without fail to the smartest person around. Bah. Come up with a real arguement please, and maybe do some hands on research into what you are talking about first, there are only a certain number of methods to disarm someone, and only a complete IDIOT would fall for the same one more then once. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about 2day warriors going against 2day assassins and rangers and halflings and whatever. I'm talking about 20day plus going against 20day plus, a 20day non-warrior fighting class KNOWS weapon combat, sure, he may not have worked on perfecting disarming, but it does not take a rocket scientist to know not to let a certain order of events happen again, else those people would not have lived so long to begin with.
Yup, sure is a skill that works well in a game that is supposed to pride itself on realism and playability. Even better when people that play said game post anon to tell people who are trying to think of ways to improve game to stop whining...Kudos to you.
Oh, and BTW, I've played some rather long lived warriors and I thought the skill was unrealistic then too, as a matter of fact, I practiced in sparring only to have a defense, it was rare for my char to try and disarm more then twice in combat.
I've a had a ranger that was attacked by a warrior. He was beating the living crap out of the warrior until he was DISARMED FIVE TIMES IN A ROW.
That just seems skewed to me.
Heheh, chill man. I'm not trying to be a dick but that all seems perfectly acceptable to me.
20 non-warrior vs 20 warrior in a melee fight...what the warrior is specifically designed to do. Yep, it should go no contest to the warrior every time.
ERS you were a ranger he was a warrior...that's his specialty not the ranger's. Don't see anything at all wrong with that.
I too have played a couple of longer-lived warriors. I've also been a ranger and had happen what happened to ERS. It was an even match until the warrior's expertise in armed combat came into play...disarm...kick...bash...
It sucked, but I have no complaints about it...it's the way it should be.
*shrugs*
I don't think non-warriors should have any special defense against disarm...
Think of it this way:
A warrior who knows the ins and outs of removing someone's weapon from them vs. someone who knows nothing of it (including defending well against it since they themselves don't know how to do it.)
Best thing to do when that warrior starts edging out your non-warrior...run the fuck away...
Evil idea: Create a secret magicker. When attacked by a warrior, wait until he disarms you then zap 'em with a spell durring the delay. That'll put a scare into 'em.
AC
I've just never seen or heard of somebody getting disarmed five times in a fight.
I agree that warrior's are meant to be superior in combat. But I don't like to see others getting consistantly beaten simply due to the use of one skill. It isn't kick, and it certainly isn't bash.
It just seems to be me that a 10 day warrior can defeat any character of any other class no matter how much they have spent training, just by employing disarm.
IMHO anyone who is good at the weapons can properly keep the weapon at hand.. He/she cannot reverse the disarm attempt or begin one but those who are strong enough to hold a sword or something should avoid a decent disarm attempt.. I don't think that there won't be a defense against the Warrior's disarm attempt..
Warriors reach up to great levels of disarming after some time but this wouldn't be the most important thing in a combat as it is right now..
I don't know what you think but Disarm is the best (over powered) warrior skill at hand and this shall be lowered at some level..
I guess i still hold onto a notion of honor, but whenever i had disarm, i never used it in a fight i was winning. As long as your winning, and doing so quickly, let some punk spam disarm. Chances are they wont score a disarm before you put them into the spot where they spam flee - and with the build up of disarm lag, they will be dead before they can flee. :)
Since AC's post was so short (but oh-so-good), I decided to post a short treatise for her.
The more i learn about the combat code, the more i realize how weak it is. It's not something I'll complain about in general. I accept the fact that this game has a weak combat code but a strong roleplay component. That's fine with me. It's a good trade. -BUT- I reserve the right to suggest improvements in the code hoping that one day armageddon will be a game with solid combat code -and- great rp.
The ability to spam disarm should be fixed. Don't care if you make it passive, add a timer, make it increasingly more difficult per try; i don't care. Disarm defense should also take general parry skill into account, not just disarm. That's like saying I can't parry daggers because I'm not trained in piercing.
bash is pretty good as it is. got real nice long delay. maybe too easy for the bashee to recover, maybe not.
Kick is absurd. It should take more into account for defense than just kick skill. Like parry and shield and evade.
It's been talked about before, but subdue should take more into account, like status of weapons, etc. Not gonna rehash that here.
Most of these skills -could- be used perfectly fine as they are, assuming everyone agreed on what was fair and everyone followed those rules. But no one agrees, and not everyone follows rules. So until the immortals say "this is about how it should be and if you spam disarm we will ban you," you're gonna find problems. Hell, even then, I imagine it's hard for an immortal to spot the guy out of the 60 people online that is spamming disarm.
Code gives the imms a break from being RP police, makes things more fair (from a players POV, not the characters), and gives the players a break from worrying about what's out of the range of proper RP. Of course, it reduces freedom of play, too.
Armageddon is a delicate balance, though, of a MUD vs. a MUSH. We don't want everything coded, nor do we want everything free. And while all players have an opinion, in the end, its those who actually put the hard time in -working- on the game, not just playing it, who get to decide.
I hope they consider my opinions when they stop reading this post and return to working on the game. If not, though, I'll still be playing, and still posting my opinions on the way things should be.
GO TEAM.
(I have never played a warrior (Or anything else with disarm, so I am just speaking from my opinion)
5 times is a bit much in a row, I agree. (Report them, I think)
And of course it is a very deadly skill, because if you don't have a weapon you Die quickly, no doubts about that.
When in doubt, Flee. don't agree? Ok.
If you know you are going to lose, why stick around to see if you are going to be right?
so.. I like disarm right now.
Because it may be spam. But misses are too! Wow, amazing.
I would like to know when they are attempting to disarm me.
As for a disarm defense, I think that would be good, simply because you could learn how to defend against it realistically.
so no disarming like this because I don't ever want to get a
"The 2 day warrior knocks the axe from your hands!"
"You do amazingly bad damage to the 2 day warrior!"
"The 2 day warrior knocks the axe from your hands!"
"You draw an uber axe of death!"
"The 2 day warrior knocks the axe from your hands!"
"Think krath damn new disarm code!"
"Welcome to armageddon!"
It might be rare if it ever happens.. but I would be the one 30-day ranger that would get killed because of it.
*editted to add*
If a warrior has mastared disarm.. i shouldn't be able to defend against it, just my opinion.
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"I've a had a ranger that was attacked by a warrior. He was beating the living crap out of the warrior until he was DISARMED FIVE TIMES IN A ROW.
That just seems skewed to me.
Not really. Does it seem Skewed that rangers can kill PCs with a single arrow? Or that magickers can kill you with a single spell, or that assassins can kill you with a single backstab? Rangers arn't ment to enter close combat, asssins strive to end it quickly, magickers, are well, magickers. Warriors are the melee kings. I dont have a problem having my 20 day assassin killed by a 5 day warrior. I should of been more careful. I wasn't doing what the assassin class is designed to do. It seems to me alot of folk dont like to flee. If some warrior attacked me, and i wasn't also a warrior, i'd flee and return the favor on my own terms.
It's a good idea, but I'm not sure it's for this mud....
I use disarm for other things that just disarming people...Like, I'll emote out swinging really hard at someone, then disarm. If it succeeds, they can emote what they want, but either way my strong arms made them loose control of their weapon.
There's also other instances...like that kungfu ninja dude I had before...disarm was used for when I grabbed someones arm and did a cool flip in the air while holding it. If I succeed, the result is them dropping their weapon cuz I caused them too much pain on their wrist, and if I fail then it means I can't emote out that move, but rather start to flip then slip and emote out like I'm on the ground witha quick recovery.
and other emotes that can be thought up.....
autodisarm is good, but what would be better is if there were more of a punishment for doing it and failing or doing it period.
Quoteautodisarm is good, but what would be better is if there were more of a punishment for doing it and failing or doing it period
I'll go with that.
I don't see anyone complaining about ultra Ranger and his crazy ass archery? Let's do this then, if disarm is butchered into what you all propose it to become, then archery should be altered as well. Disarm, does not mean you aim your weapon at their weapon. Disarm means, as a professional fighter, a master of your trade, you are able to cleverly, physically, etc. knock a weapon out of someone's hand. You might bite them, kick the weapon, hit them on the shoulder, hit them on a pressure point, feign an attack, who knows the list goes on. The current 'check' for someone spamming disarm is a fumble. Somebody spamming disarm will fumble their weapon. If they are really spamming disarm, copy it, send it to the mud. The last thing we need to do is take away the one advantage a warrior has, and that is his combat. The problem is few people are patient, and lucky enough to stay alive long enough or train long enough to get good at disarm. Or they are not warriors, and choose to engage in Melee combat. If you are not a warrior, guess what, avoid using Melee since that's not your cup of tea. Each skillset has its advantages, and disarm is a warrior's. Making it passive COMPLETELY throws off someone's fighting strategy, and is just pure nonsense I think. Let it go people, just because you can't stand up to solid disarm in melee doesn't mean it needs to go. And if you think it's ooc, I'll tell you what's ooc, wanting to go for someone's weapon and waiting for the code to do it for you. But if you all really want to play hardball, I suggest the following skills are also screwed with hardcore to make them half as useful as before: Backstab, archery, all magics, kick, throw, and steal. Obviously this is nonsense, but so is screwing with the way disarm is right now.
Just to throw a bit more into this, disarm is actually quite ok the way that it is. It's a warrior.
Warriors can get away with knocked the sword from a halfling scout's hand, if they are quick enough to do it. Even all four halflings. You know why?
They are warriors.
Five times in a row? Sorry. Should have run.
They are warriors.
Being a Warrior denotes possessing a particular apptitude for the ways of close-combat that others simply do not possess. Rangers are deadly and perfect at their own style of murder. So are Assassins. Yes, even Magickers, at their own style of killing and warfare. Suprisingly, even Merchants have a talent to kill. In, of course, their own style.
This is not so much an attack on anyone's views, and I really wouldn't care too much if it changed or not, even though I play a warrior. But the reality is this.
They are warriors.
If you want to win, bring a ton of weapons, or fight like your class is required to fight. Or better yet...
...run.
I agree with Venomz.
I think there's a pretty reasonable balance between most of the classes at present. Many muds... maybe even most muds... rely on a combat system that's purely toe-to-toe skill-vs-skill combat. Warriors, mages, and thieves sit there and slug it in the same room, and whoever comes up with the right combination of skills wins. In those cases, all of your balance relies on all the classes being fairly equal in the long run, sitting in the same room and slugging it out.
Armageddon is not most muds.
I disagree with the sentiment that the combat code is "weak," and in my opinion, that idea is brought on by the "stand and slug it out" approach that people take to combat. Warriors, in Armageddon, are the kings of the slugging it out approach, and should be. Instead of giving you new ways to sit and go toe-to-toe with someone, Armageddon gives you interesting ways to kill people. I won't outline anything specific, but the arsenal is quite varied - archery, throw, poison, backstab, sap, offensive magick, defensive magick, and even some skills and spells that you might not consider combat skills that can be used to deadly effect. When you start throwing all of those into different combinations, even simple ones, well, there are plenty of ways to end a fight without putting yourself at risk of being disarmed.
I don't think Zalanthans are going to have much of a concept of an "honorable" fight. I mean, the Tuluki consider assassination an art, and an assassin doesn't live to see the day after he takes on a mark by fighting with "honor." What I'm getting at here is that there's no social stigma against fighting as down and dirty as you can. Throw the head-to-head mentality out the window if you're not playing a warrior, pick fights on your terms, or run. The Zalanthan mentality isn't fairness, it's straight up survival.
JGG has an excellent idea, I think.
Yes JGG, sweet jesus yes! Thank you for putting my point into what you human's consider, "solid rhetoric". Every skillset has their thangamajang.. a warrior's is disarm... thank you again kind sir. You as well Venomz, fight the power.
Amen to the above three posts.
Not counting Forest Junkie.
Quote from: "Anarchy"Amen to the above three posts.
Not counting Forest Junkie.
I still love you 'narchy. *slap*
Well, this thread turned into "Is disarm an overpowered skill?" while in fact it was not my intention to rebalance disarm As I said I play very short, never seen disarm on Arm. I cannot say if it is too good or not enough. I was adressing the spamming issue not balancing issue Disarm as a passive skill might be as powerful as it is, it's all matter of how high chance there will be.
I'm not whinning about warriors, I've never fought with any of them, and it was not my intention to make warriors weaker whether they deserve it or not
Another funny thing is to observe lack of communication so typical to us, humans.
Really... Do you think that we have two opposing fronts/opinions here? Well, the truth is everybody is talking about something else. It is not a thread like:
1) disarm bad
vs
2) disarm good
It's more like:
1)
a) disarm not realistic
and/or
b) too good
vs
2) If disarm made weaker -> warriors get weaker, game loses balance
And another funny thing is that these two views are not contradictory.
For example disarm may be more realistic but not less powerful. How? Well , make it harder or longer or whatever but make penalties for picking up objects in combat more severe. After all this sword doesn't have to lie just next to you, it may lie behind your opponent, so you might get hit quite a lot before you retrive it - *if* you retrieve it:
>take sword
you get hit
you get hit
you get hit
You fail to reach your weapon.
I think it would be much more realistic than weapons flying around like UFOs and being picked up as easily (this is what I imagine after reading your posts). But not less poweful.
Another thing is that disarm may be made weaker (note: I don't know if it deserves that, I leave it to you) but warriors could get some other advantages to balance things out. Example? Well, I'm sure that warrior players have better idea what might be improved as far as warriors go :)
I agree warriors are meant to slug it out better than everyone else.
I, however, also agree that something should be done about the -ludicrous- amount of warriors who never use kick, never use bash, just spam disarm. Over. And over. And over. It's to the point that they really don't even -need- any of the other skills.
And although this goes against the notions of classes, and I'm not complaining or hoping for a change, but merely stating my opinion on this...I think a 40 day ranger, who has maxxed out his weapon skill of choice...is not going to be an easy target for the five day warrior who joined the byn and powergamed his disarm skill through the spamming method mentioned above. If they've been fighting for a decade, in game, compared to that warrior's two months...-how- superior is that warrior's ability with weapons going to be? I dunno. I don't see them falling for it that easy.
Wyrd,
Bravo, sir! Good idea.
Quote from: "Wyrd"Well, this thread turned into "Is disarm an overpowered skill?" while in fact it was not my intention to rebalance disarm As I said I play very short, never seen disarm on Arm. I cannot say if it is too good or not enough. I was adressing the spamming issue not balancing issue Disarm as a passive skill might be as powerful as it is, it's all matter of how high chance there will be.
I'm not whinning about warriors, I've never fought with any of them, and it was not my intention to make warriors weaker whether they deserve it or not
We love debate, Wyrd, and we manage to make everything into it.
There are things you can do to make yourself less vulnerable to disarm, if it is a problem for you.
The helpfiles say that gloves make you easier to disarm, ok, so if being disarmed is a major problem for you then don't wear gloves. You'll take a little more dammage, but not as much as you will if you drop all your weapons and have to fight unarmed. And you won't get bloody gloves every time you skin something, which is a bonus. ;)
Choose your fighting style carefully. Using two weapons at a time means it is difficult for someone to completely disarm you. Durring the disarm skill delay you have more than enough time to change hands and draw another weapon. Disarm has a skill delay, change hands and draw do not.
Or you might choose to go with a two-handed fighting style. The helpfiles don't say if that helps against disarm, but it seems logical that it would. It should be harder to knock away a weapon that is being held with two hands.
I'm sure there are other things you can do to improve your situation. If the warrior keeps disarming you, then run away and think of a new stratagy. Excessive use of disarm is probably bad, but the other guy is fighting for his life too, so you have to expect him to do what he knows works.
AC
Disarm seems good the way it is.
Just the delay annoys me. It is too short. Too short and abusable.
>disarm;get all
Spam this and you are going to win all the fight. It is the best code-supported way to win melee.
Make getting a weapon from the ground impossible in combat if you have your hands full. In fact, I'd suggest making it impossible period, but specifically, during combat.
Also, there is drop code that kicks in from time to time, when you try to give something to someone else. Adapt this for combat, making it give the message: You try to get a black iron sword, but fumble.
Regardless, I like disarm the way it is currently. The delay is fine, the ability and unfairness is fine. Disarm is fine.
They are warriors.
All I gotta say, is SHIELD skill.
Yes...it sucks that you lose offensive if your weapon is disarmed...but that doesn't mean you gotta turn into a sitting duck.
Quote from: "wizturbo"All I gotta say, is SHIELD skill.
Yes...it sucks that you lose offensive if your weapon is disarmed...but that doesn't mean you gotta turn into a sitting duck.
Amen.
Quote from: "Angela Christine"There are things you can do to make yourself less vulnerable to disarm, if it is a problem for you.
I don't know if it refers to me, but if so, I think I made it more than clear that I have no problem with disarm, at least no problem with disarm being *good* (or too good) skill.
I rather wanted to present some idea that would deal with:
1. spamming disarm
2. unrealistic combats as a result of spamming disarm
And frankly speaking this *really* has nothing to do with disarm being too good or too bad. (Though if some people think disarm is too good I also presented some ideas, but it's really not the main thing)
Well, while maybe spamming disarm is a bit weak on their part...consider this....realistically...they wouldn't have to do it more than once.
Most likely a single successful disarm would be the end of the fight as it should be harder than it is for you to retrieve your weapon.
As Venomz said, I think making it harder to pick up things during combat period would solve the problem.
You might not like them spamming disarm, but they might not like you auto picking up your weapon every time either.
Yeah, most definitely it should be made harder to pick things up in combat for -anyone- involved in the fight.
Heh, someone's example of a 40 day ranger being beat by a much lesser lived warrior...still no problem with that...he's still a ranger...melee combat is not his strength and even at his best, should still be taken down by the majority of warriors.
I've seen a seven day warrior beat a nearly 40 day ranger without disarming him.
You already do get penalized for picking something up in a fight.
At least, that's how I remember it. It's been a long while since I played my last PCvPC combat-heavy character.
Only sorta.
It is VERY easy to get around that penalty, always has been, funny thing is, it is easier for a person who has fumbled a disarm attempt to pick up his weapon without the opponent getting a free swing then it is for a person who has been disarmed...though not much.
And that is my main problem with it (there are others posted before, but none stand so high) Warrior or not, bending over to pick up your weapon should be something you NEVER want to do except as a last resort. As it stands now, a warrior has ZERO to worry about on a fumbled disarm, even if he does not manage to do so without his enemy getting a free attack (rare) Then his other skills still work, somehow, while bending over to pick up a weapon (you have to look at it to grab it you know, not to mention stopping movement and dodging and having to bend over) He can STILL parry and dodge swings, even from multiple opponents. Personaly, I think that if the penalties were increased for doing such (no parry -50% defense and a slight delay), the disarm skill would, in the long run be more powerful, Since a good warrior could run somebody out of weapons to the point they have to flee or risk picking up a weapon from the ground. It would decrease disarm spam too. Add in a delay before and after and I'd be happy. Delay before and after adds a bit more strategy to combat, specialy for the warrior.
Yes this is pretty much a derailment here but the skill that bothers me more is the sap skill. I can understand if you sneak up behind someone and knock them over the head, but If I am fighting you and you can't hit me during the fight, but yet you can type sap, and nearly knock me out? How is that attempt to hit me any different than the rest?
You can't sap if engaged in combat.
If you get sapped during combat, your opponent had a buddy.
Warriors would not somehow mystically turn into weaklings if disarm was changed to be a skill with some nodding acquaintance with realism. I see more very old warriors than any other class - those strong melee offence and defence skills pay off, because most times you come under attack it's close up and personal.
But as it stands, disarm is highly overpowered. I've played (in twinkier days) the warrior who would sail through a crowd of gith, sending their weapons flying in every direction. It's not even vaguely realistic. Persuading someone skilled to relinquish their grip on a weapon that they are likely to die if they lose ought to be a difficult business. It is not unless they happen to be a warrior.
How are you all imagining this disarming is taking place? Do you see a perfectly collected and dangerous assassin turning into a fumbling display of ineptitude as soon as some clumsy warrior who can't even manage to parry his blows attempts to knock a weapon from his hands?
Quirk
That's what I was saying, Quirk.
Recently I was disarmed and at one point emoted and went to get the weapon before ditching out...and damn, I don't think the penalty for getting a weapon while in combat as that sucked a whole bunch.
I play a character with disarm and I think it is plausible if you think about it for just a mere second, that you would be able to pick up your weapons if you planned it carefully.
*editted for tired mistakes*
QuoteHow are you all imagining this disarming is taking place? Do you see a perfectly collected and dangerous assassin turning into a fumbling display of ineptitude as soon as some clumsy warrior who can't even manage to parry his blows attempts to knock a weapon from his hands?
Hello. -Assassin-. An assassin utilizing their strengths shouldn't be going to blows with a warrior, it's not their area of expertise.
The warrior should've had his throat slit when he had his back turned.
An assassin is not an expert in the area of melee combat and can never be.
He doesn't know how to disarm someone, then he wouldn't know how to stop it as well either.
As was stated by someone earlier, all guilds have their own way about killing someone if it's in their character to do so and they are all different.
Again, the best fix would be to just make it harder for anyone to pick up things during combat. It would both work against the warrior (when he/she fumbles on a botched disarm attempt) and against the warrior's opponent (when they are disarmed).
I say leave everything else about it alone, this fix alone would make it more realistic and maintain the balance and the melee combat superiority that a warrior is supposed to have vs. all other guilds.
This one thing would fix alot of the complaints about it.
(At least the reasonable complaints, I don't believe non-warriors having no defense against it is a reasonable complaint, it's akin to any other guild complaining they've no defense against whatever the others can do that they can't.)
Warriors are limited in almost all other areas, let them have the one thing noone else can do or defend against unless they also know how to do it.
Oh yeah, no reason for the anon posting other than I've not posted anon since before the Anonymous Kank replaced Guest...heheh, I'm kinda wierd like that I guess.
Quote from: "Quirk"Warriors would not somehow mystically turn into weaklings if disarm was changed to be a skill with some nodding acquaintance with realism.
I don't see eye-to-eye with the THEY ARE WARRIORS arguement.
Every class in the game has a different level of melee prowess. If the only purpose of this was to allow warrior's to beat everybody, we could reduce them to where rangers are currently and everybody else to where merchants are currently. But the purpose of this variety, in my opinion, is to maintain balance and ensure that any warrior character in the game can't beat any other given character in the game. And besides, nobody should be able to defeat four halflings unless they're a magicker.
QuoteAnd besides, nobody should be able to defeat four halflings unless they're a magicker.
I think a skilled warrior/fighter can manage a fight against four opponents. Especially, if those opponents are miniature-sized.
Quote from: "Dirr"QuoteAnd besides, nobody should be able to defeat four halflings unless they're a magicker.
I think a skilled warrior/fighter can manage a fight against four opponents. Especially, if those opponents are miniature-sized.
Manage to retreat with his/her life, MAYBE. Defeat them? Absolutely not unless those halflings are untrained in combat.
Who cares how small they are. They are the most agile race in the known world, and would be enormously difficult to hit, and their accuracy with their attacks would be frightening.
You're forgetting the fact that I specifically said a -skilled- warrior, not some jackass who cannot hit anything. So a good archer can hit a gimpka rat a distance of one mile or more, but a melee warrior can't hit a halfling?
in a fantasy world, they can be defeated.
In real life, if you are facing more than 2 or three opponents, you "win" by getting away in one piece.
I like my fantasy world. Otherwise, i'd be hiring the vertically challenged to fight me.
Arm, AKA D&D (death and damnation), is focused primarily on survival roleplay and gritty realism. If you want to defeat ten orcs at once and then save the busty elf princess, you're playing the wrong game.
Quote from: "Anonymous"An assassin is not an expert in the area of melee combat and can never be.
He doesn't know how to disarm someone, then he wouldn't know how to stop it as well either.
o rly?
Quote from: "http://www.armageddon.org/general/guilds.html#assassin"Highly skilled assassins tend to become more akin to warriors late in their careers.
Quote from: "EvilRoeSlade"Arm, AKA D&D (death and damnation), is focused primarily on survival roleplay and gritty realism. If you want to defeat ten orcs at once and then save the busty elf princess, you're playing the wrong game.
Reiterating because people don't seem to understand this.
QuoteArm, AKA D&D (death and damnation), is focused primarily on survival roleplay and gritty realism. If you want to defeat ten orcs at once and then save the busty elf princess, you're playing the wrong game.
Oh yeah? And is it realistic for one half-giant to annhilate a mek in a few hits or for an archer to bring down a bahamet with one shot by hitting it in the eye from a league away? That's all realistic?
Quote from: "Dirr"QuoteArm, AKA D&D (death and damnation), is focused primarily on survival roleplay and gritty realism. If you want to defeat ten orcs at once and then save the busty elf princess, you're playing the wrong game.
Oh yeah? And is it realistic for one half-giant to annhilate a mek in a few hits or for an archer to bring down a bahamet with one shot by hitting it in the eye from a league away? That's all realistic?
No, that's an oversight/bug with the code.
Quote from: "Dirr"Oh yeah? And is it realistic for one half-giant to annhilate a mek in a few hits
Never seen that happen, and I suspect that if it indeed did it was when the game was younger and mekillots didn't have a reasonable amount of might that their size demands.
Quote from: "Dirr"Or for an archer to bring down a bahamet with one shot by hitting it in the eye from a league away?
I've never seen that happen either, nor have I heard an account of it, but it is realistic.
Mmm...yes.
Half-giants -can- take down meks. They're that strong. Once again, someone underestimates the giant.
And yes. An arrow through the eye kills...just...about anything, doesn't it?
Although, I've never heard of this happening in game.
My point is... just because -you- cannot contemplate someone beating four opponents in real life combat, doesn't mean it cannot happen realistically and within the game.
QuoteAnd yes. An arrow through the eye kills...just...about anything, doesn't it?
I'd like to see you shoot a shell-enclosed creature in the eye. Are you people listening to yourselves?
So you're going to sit there and tell me that a skilled archer -can- and -should- be able to shoot a bahamet in the eye from one league away, yet a skilled warrior can't take down four halflings? WOW. I'm done, because I don't know how else to prove my point.
Once again, I'll say that I've never seen it happen or heard about anyone doing it.
But beyond that, I don't see a realism problem with somebody killing a bahamet if they succesfully hit it in the eye. The only thing the shell would interfere with is your ability to succesfully strike its eye (assuming it can pull into its shell, and I've never seen that happen either). But once you do, you're home free. The very least such an attack would do is partially blind the creature, drive it insane with pain, and severely and irrevocably diminish its fearsomeness. If the bahamet dies, however, you know that your arrow reached its brain.
I'm with carnage. I think he's saying that this game isn't perfectly real, and shouldn't be. He's stressing the playability side of the Playability vs realism debate.
But honestly, we are WAY THE FUCK off track.
Back to disarm spam:
It's bad, mmmkay?
Quote from: "Agent_137"But honestly, we are WAY THE FUCK off track.
Yep.
Quote from: "Agent_137"Back to disarm spam:
It's bad, mmmkay?
Yep.
Disarm spam bad, but I do have to answer this.
QuoteI'd like to see you shoot a shell-enclosed creature in the eye. Are you people listening to yourselves?
So you're going to sit there and tell me that a skilled archer -can- and -should- be able to shoot a bahamet in the eye from one league away, yet a skilled warrior can't take down four halflings? WOW. I'm done, because I don't know how else to prove my point
I personally know a woman who, with a recurve bow can hit a half dollar coin tossed into the air from 50 feet 8 out of 10 times. Gotta figure a bahamet's eye is at least the size of a dinner plate, I can hit a dinner plate with my compound from 80 feet 9 of 10 times.
can a skilled warrior take down 4 halflings, sure, if they are merchants, but here I was talking about 4 halfling warrior npc's, "people" who should represent at least the average that race has to offer IE skilled warriors, and with the highest agility in the game. No single warrior of any race should be able to do that alone, at least not by the method involved, disarm, disarm,disarm,disarm,disarm,disarm,disarm,disarm,disarm, new weapons drawn or picked up, whatever ones did not fly from the room, disarm,disarm,disarm,disarm. Bah.
And all this while being attacked by FOUR things at a time, somehow managed to defend, attack, dodge AND set up to remove weapons from his enemies, with little risk to himself since he used 2 weapons and disarm delay is short and only after. BAH I say.
Think of it this way. To kill someone, you need not do more then cut them once on certain points upon their body. Therefore, a -master- of combat, can and will kill four people with his masterful strokes. Sure he will take some damage, as it is nearly impossible to evade the attacks of four people. However, it is so feasable that it makes my head hurt for someone to kill four people in a fight. Imagine someone just slicing the throat of one of them, leaping backward and catching one in the eye, getting one on the achilles so one person is immobile, and then the last one on the throat or what not. Sure you will get hit a little doing this, but it is very very feasable. Why are you trying to ruin the game, if you want the game to be even more realistic then it is, why not just stop playing and enjoy your life. It is a game, and sure it is possible in the context of this game for someone to kill four people in a fight. Are you going to leave unscathed? NO! Is it easy? HELL NO! Just like shooting a bahamet in the eye like my man Dirr said. It is tough as balls, but it -might- be done by a master. A MASTER! Just like what a warrior would be who can kill four halflings, beyond master in fact.
And carnage, I suggest you look up the term akin in the dictionary. Akin, in this context, means having similar quality or characteristics. Will they ever be a warrior? NO! Can they get kind of close in some aspects, yes they can. Which is what that helpfile is saying. Not to mention, I'd like to see an assasin who is that old, stand up to a warrior who is that old. Would be kind of funny actually.
Now think about it people, we play a game where men can say crazy words and shoot lightening out of their hands! Is that realistic, I sure hope not. But that is how it is IG, much like a master of a warrior is able to kill four people ig is how it is. If you don't like it? That is a shame that you are dismayed by the accomplishments of your fellow players through a very long-lived and disciplined career with their character. I personally don't bitch about how somethings can kill a warrior before he knows what happened. Which is why you people should stop complaining about warriors owning in melee. Now back to spam disarm, hell yes it is bad. Do we take it out on everyone? No! I have seen thieves, templars, magickers, blah blah who abuse their skills with no rp so pitifully it makes me sick. Every guild has skills that some idiot will abuse in a negative way. Please people, I seriously am asking this nicely, stop trying to ruin people's fun due to your retentive principles of realism. Zalanthans have a completely different constitution then humans do in our society. Which is why they can do things we can't. I.E.: Kill four halflings. Let it be, let the warriors have their fun in the way they are meant to have fun, and if they are rp'ing it poorly, then send a mail to the mud explaining your logic or something. If someone goes out looking for four halflings, unless they have a damn good ic reason for it, sure it is bad rp. But if four attack you, it is not very feasable to just run as they are fast and know the terrain like the back of their little, filthy, cute hands. I don't like a lot of things that go on ig, but I have learned to deal with it in one way or another. Demanding that the code is adjusted to your needs is not the way to do it imho. Just let it be, please.
*Claps his grubby little paws together for Faglore.* 8)
Faglore, this one instance (and I've seen more) That warrior was COMPLETLY unable to hit an armed halfling warrior one on one, this is not a "master" warrior by any sense of the word, nor are 99% of the chars that can do such things, they just twink on code knowing that disarm is an easy and painless skill to work up and that an unarmed char of any class, no matter how skilled they are is an easy target.
Now, to your example..Dude, STOP WATCHING KILL BILL.
No joke man, the idea of a single human being with a pair of swords being able to beat FOUR even slightly trained healthy humans is beyond silly, I'd have to go to look up words strong enough for the idea, and we are not even talking about a human taking on four humans.
Do we want it to be "real" we want it to be with enough "realism" To not throw you out of the fantasy with a jolt and you sit back and go WTF was that shit?! People talk about "It's a WARRIOR, deal with it." then turn around and compare it to backstab or archery. Fine, lets do that.
Oh, wait, you really can't because backstab, though a very powerful skill is VERY hard to raise and because staff watches over people who do try to raise it and people shout TWINK any time anybody gets even good enough to do 20hp damage with it. Archery takes huge sums of money and patience to raise to the level of one arrow one kill possibility and is still easily defended against..hell, a warrior can parry the arrows!
I'm riding piggyback on every single one of X-D's posts. Because he is uber and all that shit.
Agree 100%
Sorry but if it weren't for disarm...any other guild that's even somewhat combat oriented would be able to stand up to a warrior of equal days..it's the warrior's disarm skill which balances that out and prevents it from happening.
Quit whining, it's not a h&s game...otherwise every guild would be able to hold it's own against the others in melee combat at some point. Now THAT'S unrealistic.
Heheh, gank disarm and it's like...hrrrmmm may as well just go with rangers...eventually you'll get parry...and all this other cool shit to boot...why be a warrior if any other guild can stand up to you at equal days in melee...that'd be pretty pathetic for one WHO'S FUCKING SPECIALTY IS MELEE!!
If warriors couldn't do what they can, it'd be a pretty pointless guild to choose...they don't have anything else. They're limited in so many other ways it's pathetic...many times it's like...dammit need me a ranger or merchant to find that little fuck that's hiding from us...any other things they get non-combat related all come from subguilds and can never get very good.
Some very useful things that those other guilds get....a warrior can -never- have, or if they can...will never be good enough at for it to be of much use.
No one is suggesting removing disarm from the game; the discussion has degenerated (loosely) to balancing it.
Right, and I think the skill itself is perfectly balanced, now the issue of people picking things up during combat is a different...but related issue.
My concern is a ROLEPLAYING one. It has -nothing- to do with the code.
Code says you can kill a mekillot solo. Code says you can take on 4 halfling warriors by using disarm constantly. Code says look at someone who has a mask on and see every detail of them.
Code is one thing. Realistic roleplay is another.
If a warrior is walking in the woods alone and is assaulted by four halfling warriors, what should that warrior do? Realistically...they should realize the chances of them defeating those halflings is basically zero, and they should retreat. If your cornered, and cannot run...fine, do whatever you gotta do to survive and then roleplay that it was an amazing spurt of luck. Roleplay that the Highlord himself empowered you to defeat those halflings single-handedly...because realistically your chances of survival would be slim to none. But for fuck's sake, don't go out there and hunt four more just because you know codedly you can with little risk.
If a mekillot (something larger then the size of a huge house) attacks you in the desert...while the code says you can use your uber archery skill to kill it...whats the more realistic course of action? Run. A creature of that strength could kill you in a single blow, and you couldn't parry something so massive, it'd just snap your blade in half.
Now...lets say your a guard...trying to protect your beloved spice merchant who's being attacked by a mekillot! Now what do you do...? Well if your a heroic type, you might charge the mekillot and buy your merchant friend some time to escape. But should you go out and hunt mekillots by yourself because some arbitrary skill called 'parry' is able to allow it, FUCK NO.
Anon, as Lazloth said, nobody said remove disarm, far from it, if anybody was talking about doing so I'd be loud in arguing against getting rid of it.
But, if you think that disarm is the only thing that makes them special, well, I have two things to say.
First, you REALLY need to play a warrior longer, even without disarm they are awesome combat machines, especialy later in life, no non-warrior class could even begin to match them, even without disarm.
Second, you are exactly the type of person I talk about, work disarm...disarm disarm disarm, only skill worthwhile. When a single skill makes a class in peoples opinion then there is something wrong with that skill or the way it gets used, in this case, both.
(EDIT TO ADD)
As far as disarm's current incarnation, being able to pick things up in combat currently is fine, Hey, if we are going to be unrealistic, lets make sure that it is fair and unrealistic all the way around. Of course...we should put HP regen back the way it was so the high end races get that clear advantage, oh, and kick damage should be put back, thirst should go back down and you should get more water from food again.
(Disclaimer:Most of the edited paragraph was sarcasm.)
Let me remind you, that a Zalanthan man is not a man of our world. He has a for stronger constitution. He is able to survive harsh harsh weather, starvation to a degree, dehydration to a degree, every day he faces perils we as humans never even dream of. Therefore, to compare what we as humans can do to what a Zalanthan man does ig is a fruitless arguement. Now I totally agree that there could be a slight delay perhaps, I am totally for that. What I am argueing, as you can see by my post. is these people who want to significantly reduce disarm, and significantly reduce a warrior's ability. For example, I am argueing more at Evilroeslade's posts, along with others. I definatly don't twink out my disarms, so I would not give two poopies about a delay on using disarm for the same person. But as for using it on other people, there should be no delay. Remember, as a master warrior it is very feasable to get to four people's death spots before they kill you, sure you will get wounded, but you can kill them before they kill you. Why? Because you know where to hit them, how to hit them, and how to protect several crucial areas on your body while you do so. Do you go looking for trouble like this? Of course not, that is not good rp unless you are looking to commit suicide or something, or some other good ig reason though I fail to grasp one. Remember people, how many people can do this out of say 500,000.. two, three people? And in most cases, you kick ass with disarm because those damn npc's spam disarm you. Welcome to the world of yofault.
Go to bed, people, and let this thread die. Please.
Quote from: "Agent_137"Go to bed, people, and let this thread die. Please.
Where is the fun in that? :P
The only way to kill a thread is to start more interesting threads, ones that distract everone from the "bad" thread. So what would everyone find more facinating than disarm? I don't know, but I suggest something to do with sex.
AC
I agree with AC as always. Spamming "moans loudly" is twinkish in mudsex.
That is not starting a new thread, that is derailing an already derailed thread and could possibly destroy the universe as we know it!!
So, in effort to prevent this.
Disarm spam BAD!
Bad!
edit:
Bad disarm spam. Bad bad disarm spam.
emote continues scolding ~disarm-spam as people shake their heads
So many people agree that there is something wrong with disarm. Like for example Faglore and Anonymous Kank. Their arguments againts disarm work even better when combined together so I'll do it for them.
Faglore said:
QuoteTo kill someone, you need not do more then cut them once on certain points upon their body. Therefore, a -master- of combat, can and will kill four people with his masterful strokes. Sure he will take some damage, as it is nearly impossible to evade the attacks of four people. However, it is so feasable that it makes my head hurt for someone to kill four people in a fight. Imagine someone just slicing the throat of one of them, leaping backward and catching one in the eye, getting one on the achilles so one person is immobile, and then the last one on the throat or what not. Sure you will get hit a little doing this, but it is very very feasable.
in another post:
QuoteRemember, as a master warrior it is very feasable to get to four people's death spots before they kill you, sure you will get wounded, but you can kill them before they kill you. Why? Because you know where to hit them, how to hit them, and how to protect several crucial areas on your body while you do so.
Faglore points out the fact that it is not disarm skill that makes a warrior but his overall combat ability, precision, reflexes etc (note that he doesn't use word disarm even once in his examples of master warrior).
Anonymous Kank:
QuoteSorry but if it weren't for disarm...any other guild that's even somewhat combat oriented would be able to stand up to a warrior of equal days..
Here Kank points out that it is unfortunatelly not the case. He makes us notice that disarm is warriors *main* weapon against anybody else.
In fact I think that we should change guild name from warrior to
DisarmerThis leads to a problem presented by X-D:
QuoteFaglore, this one instance (and I've seen more) That warrior was COMPLETLY unable to hit an armed halfling warrior one on one, this is not a "master" warrior by any sense of the word, nor are 99% of the chars that can do such things, they just twink on code knowing that disarm is an easy and painless skill to work up and that an unarmed char of any class, no matter how skilled they are is an easy target.
Try to imagine above situation. Try to imagine Johnny the warrior not being able to hit halflings with his, let's say, hammer and then accuratelly hitting their weapons, let's say daggers (which are smaller than halfs, believe it or not) or the hand (also smaller than a whole half, really, and as agile as the rest of him) witch holds it, repeatedly (!) He not only hits... but manages to make them drop their weapon (somewhat harder than just hitting it)
While the scene pesented by Faglore may be called Hollywood-like, this one is plain silly. And I don't think combat on such a gritty world like armageddon should be silly. I would much more like it Hollywood-like or maybe even realistic (but hollywood-like is also good).
...just combining what other people said...
oh and roleplaying issue...
Wizturbo said:
QuoteCode is one thing. Realistic roleplay is another.
And he is right, but not entirely. This two subjects are combined, like it or not. Example? Crafting delay. It could be removed and we could count on people that they will spent appropriet time sitting and emoting... and certainly some of them would do it... some of them; maybe even majority... but we *would* have a problem of 'speedy' crafters.
Code can be used to:
1. Make situations that take place in game more realistic and imaginable.
2. Promote roleplaying by removing or limiting twinkish temptations.
3. Balancing between PCs and their skills.
I started this thread with points 1 and 2 in mind. Point 3 might be not so important (though still an issue I belive) because zalanthas is a harsh word and not very 'fair'.
Wyrd, read this.
Quote from: "X-D"When a single skill makes a class in peoples opinion then there is something wrong with that skill or the way it gets used, in this case, both.
Disarm is not a warrior's "*main*" weapon against anybody else. They have plenty of other things they can do in combat.
Granted, I disagree that the skill has something wrong with it, having been on both ends of it recently and seen how it works. I feel it is a problem with some players and how they use the skill.
Hrrm. I've been mulling over this shit a good while, and I -think- that I figured something out:
When a pc attempts a disarm against his opponent, his cap of the skill is rolled against the opposing pc's. Whomever has a higer roll due to their higer disarm skill gets the win, while the other loses his/her weapon.
What if:
Disarm were first rolled against the opposing pc's agility? This would be far more realistic, and allow for critters like halflings to retain their uber badassness against 10 day warriors.
Let me expand. When two people are fighting, player 1 will attempt a disarm. If he wins his roll against his opponents in agility, -then- he will be able to attempt a disarm, in which another roll will take place.
Possible way the code would work:
>disarm dude
Slowly, you circle around your opponent, waiting for an opening to counter their weapon onto the ground.
(roll of die in agility on both sides)
If you win:
You slam your weapon against your oppenent's, wrenching it from their hands onto the ground!
If you lose:
You fumble the parry and lose your own weapon instead! (won agility role yet lost disarm)
Your opponent swiftly leaps back, grinning at your failed attempt.(lost the agility role)
This would cut back tons of spam, and make the skill, IMO, more realistic. You have to be swift in order to even USE your skill. The disarm skill itself is just that. Anyone can learn how to disarm, but the point is, are they quick enough?
Maybe a harsh solution, but hell, say bye bye to spammo.
Gosh, what a wonderful idea....let's make more coded things in the game count on agility...further making the -stat- more important. :roll:
All I'm saying is...I don't want to see something done just to specifically make disarm weaker. There are other routes to make the whole function more realistic (in a fair and balanced way) without weakening it.
As far as the whole twink disarm thing...that's bullshit, whoever said that doesn't know me (never even started trying to disarm until around ten days with either of my longer lived warriors) ...my point about it is...take two warriors...equal in all ways except for one...disarm...one is better than the other...that one will win.
Kick...not as significant...armor tends to absorb it all now unless you have insane strength.
Bash...not really...the skill is shit anyway unless your a hg.
Yes, disarm spam is bad...but so is the fact that people can so easily retrieve their weapons...the drawback isn't bad enough for trying to pick up a weapon in combat...with a 40 day warrior...people would just easily snatch their weapon back unless I got an exceptional disarm on them.
This pc's weapon skill had branched over 15 days of play previously and it didn't matter who I was fighting...most of the time I'd still miss them when they went to pick it up. (Even though I was hitting them with their weapon in their hand before.) :roll:
As for the arguement about not being able to hit someone with their weapon in their hand but you disarm them and kick the shit out of them without it???? What in the name of flying monkeys is wrong with that???
Absolutely nothing, it's just people trying to rationalize fucking with the disarm skill and make it so non-warriors can stand against them better...not needed...not realistic either.
I'd like to know -who- has seen a warrior fight four halfling warriors IG...I don't believe it...not even a little...my last warrior could only beat one of them at around forty days and it took him down to moderate condition.
Quote from: "Dude"Gosh, what a wonderful idea....let's make more coded things in the game count on agility...further making the -stat- more important.
Thank you, smartass. As I said, it was an idea, not something I was truly serious about.
Quote from: "Dude"All I'm saying is...I don't want to see something done just to specifically make disarm weaker. There are other routes to make the whole function more realistic (in a fair and balanced way) without weakening it.
What are these "routes" then? Please, enlighten me.
Quote from: "Dude"
As for the arguement about not being able to hit someone with their weapon in their hand but you disarm them and kick the shit out of them without it???? What in the name of flying monkeys is wrong with that???
Absolutely nothing, it's just people trying to rationalize fucking with the disarm skill and make it so non-warriors can stand against them better...not needed...not realistic either.
If you are not fast enough to hit your target, how are you fast enough to knock that target's weapon into the next room? I'm sure you have a good reason.
QuoteIf you are not fast enough to hit your target, how are you fast enough to knock that target's weapon into the next room? I'm sure you have a good reason.
Element of surprise, they're not expecting your attack to be directed at their weapon...they're expecting it to be directed at striking them.
As I already said...make it so it's harder for people to pick up things during combat...make there be a chance you can't pick it up due to evading incoming attacks from your opponent...and make the negatives to picking it up while fighting much worse.
No reason to spam disarm if they couldn't pick up their weapons so easily.
Maybe increase the delay a little, but only on a failed disarm attempt.
With all of those...a critically failed disarm attempt would really suck...not only is there a delay before you could do anything...but you still have to get your weapon back...there's a chance you might not be able to...and you may just get messed up trying to.
So, it would tone it down a little...cutting down the spam...but not entirely to the detriment of the disarmer...because it would balance things out on -both- sides a bit better.
QuoteElement of surprise, they're not expecting your attack to be directed at their weapon...they're expecting it to be directed at striking them.
Um, sure, 4 warriors in a row, never expected you to aim for the weapon, though they are skilled in combat and disarm, more skilled in every area of combat except disarm then your char. The best part is they are all dumber then half-giants because after the first two got disarmed they were still not expecting it to happen to them. Heh, try again.
Quote...my point about it is...take two warriors...equal in all ways except for one...disarm...one is better than the other...that one will win
Your point is moot, Why, because two otherwise equal warriors, it does not matter what skill is better on one of them, they are then not equal and the other will win, does not matter if it is bash, disarm, kick, parry etc
Plenty of threads of people bitching about kick and two equal warriors but one with a better kick skill wins, which is as it should be. Same for disarm.
But you are sitting there saying warriors are worthless without that skill, or even if said skill is balanced or "weakened" some. Which proves the point of the skill being unbalanced by you and others saying so, you even state (incorrectly I might add) That kick and bash are worthless, farther showing that you think disarm is what makes the warrior class.
Now, anything that can be done to balance disarm so it is less easily twinked/spammed etc will be considered a weakening of the skill by most.
(edit)
Though I am all for a simple increase in delay either longer after or add delay before and keep current after, forces more of a commitment to a disarm attempt. And increased delay on failed disarm attempts after, showing off balance or what have you. Combined with increased penalties for picking stuff up from the ground in combat. Hey, if nothing else then when the person flees the raider the raider might at least have gotten a weapon or two out of it.:)
Uhmmm...okay dude...you obviously aren't even reading everything I wrote...I said you can balance it out...on BOTH sides. It's unrealistic in a way for BOTH the disarmer and the disarmed NOT just the disarmer.
Most of the suggestions purely make it more realistic against the disarmer instead of making it more realistic for BOTH.
Are you getting me? You reading what I'm saying yet? Or still making assumptions about me because I don't think it should be fixed in a one-sided way?
I never said a damned thing about successfully surprising four people in a row...just one...in fact I DID say that I don't believe anyone beat down four halfling warriors solo...I think someone is exaggerating when they said that.
I'll agree that warriors SHOULD be the masters of melee. I don't think having unrealistic skills is the way to go about it.
Just like kick, which from what I've seen has been toned down but still suffers from the, 'you don't have the skill so you are fucked if someone kicks you' point of view. Having unrealistic skills may make things even but it isn't they way to go about it. Also, just because warriors are warriors, doesn't mean from hour one to day 50 they should be the only people that can be in melee combat and stand their own. A skilled ranger, assassin, burglar ... Thief what have you should be able to stand their own against a less skilled warrior in combat. But if that warrior has a decent disarm, or a decent kick skill, the fight is way skewed.
I'll just say that. Yes right now it's balanced, but it's balanced in an unrealistic way. It SHOULD be balanced, just not in the way it is.
Creeper
QuoteI'll just say that. Yes right now it's balanced, but it's balanced in an unrealistic way. It SHOULD be balanced, just not in the way it is.
YES!!! Finally somone who understands what I'm trying to say!! :lol:
Something needs to be fixed to make it more REALISTIC...but it's BALANCED just fine. Most of the suggestions, while making it more realistic, would unbalance it against the warrior guild.
Whew! Damn, I was starting to feel everything I was saying was falling on closed minds and deaf ears. :)
I think warriors basic offense/defense skills are significantly higher than all other classes to deem them as balanced.
Have a couple day old assasin....he'll get whooped by a day old warrior.
QuoteHave a couple day old assasin....he'll get whooped by a day old warrior.
AFAIR assassins don't have the pretty important 'parry' skill. It's because of parry.
While I am not completely certian about this, I think it will be very hard to ever fight four halfling warriors at once. Most of those scouts are ... well ... scouts, ie: Rangers. SO four of them, kill them. CUtely enough, this is a realistic fantasy world. So, lets make our fantasy realistic. I don't care how you do it, but lets do it. And then, as the motto at the top, write Biased for Realism.
QuoteUhmmm...okay dude...you obviously aren't even reading everything I wrote...I said you can balance it out...on BOTH sides. It's unrealistic in a way for BOTH the disarmer and the disarmed NOT just the disarmer.
Most of the suggestions purely make it more realistic against the disarmer instead of making it more realistic for BOTH.
Are you getting me? You reading what I'm saying yet? Or still making assumptions about me because I don't think it should be fixed in a one-sided way?
I never said a damned thing about successfully surprising four people in a row...just one...in fact I DID say that I don't believe anyone beat down four halfling warriors solo...I think someone is exaggerating when they said that.
Who is not reading who's posts? I've stated through the whole thread that it needs to be balanced on both sides, hell, thats what the edit is on the last one. And though you call some suggestions "balance in a one sided way" Maybe they are, but to reduce "disarm spam" which I and a few others think is done to an unrealistic degree.
And you did not say 4 at a time, true, but that has been the example given and what people have been replying to, and what you replied to.
As to exaggerating...Heh, no, I was not, and by a warrior that was in the game for 2 rl months at the time (no clue on days played, though it would be hard to be over 20days) Human, since my char was shadowing him at the time.
I've also seen very old warriors breeze through many gith, but I'll not say anything about them because I don't have too much of a problem with a 80day warrior that somebody has had for 2RL years+ being able to handle a few average warriors..or any other class for that matter
Now, also, as to warriors being able to take other classes...well, look at it from another direction, sure, warriors are the gods of melee, fine, but an assassin who has been around for 15 IC years and 60 days played KNOWS his weapon, He has the art/skill/style down, it should be HARD to seperate him from his weapon, if not nearly impossible. But it is not because of the way the coded skill works, a 10day warrior, a char that cannot hit the assassin and that the assassin hits easily can easily "suprise" him and make his weapon leave his hand, its silly. Of course the assassin could probly still punch the warrior to death, but that is beside the point. That assassin IS a master of his weapon style, something you cannot become without knowing how to grip and retain your weapon, Hell, IRL the most common way somebody becomes disarmed is in a strike or parry, not by an attempt by his opponent to remove the weapon.
Old warriors develope skills that if they practice them they can easily take any non warrior with any time on them without ever using the disarm skill or kick or bash and no non-warrior has a defense for them...unbalanced, no, why because at that point they ARE masters. A ten day warrior who has done nothing but work one skill being able to do the same thing, that is unbalanced. Currently, I think disarm already checks against agility and disarm, check how easy it is to disarm low agi races. I think it should check against agility/str/weapon skill and disarm, this would be a realistic method to balance the skill.
Though I still would be happy with longer delay forcing a warrior to commit to action and for penalties to picking weapons up from the ground to be increased.
The only good thing about the current penalties right now is that at least that 40day ranger can grab his weapon with little danger from that 10day (green) warrior. But it does not stop the spam.
The problem with disarm is that it isn't merely the deciding factor in battles between warriors and non-warriors.
I once had a gladiator, back when the institution was available to PCs. I picked disarm as one of the two skills that the immortals will boost on account of you being a gladiator. When it was time for the arena RPT, I fought an opponent clearly superior to me, who I couldn't hit and couldn't defend against. However, since I had disarm boosted and she did not, I defeated her simply by disarming her a lot. Note that she was also a warrior, since gladiator non-warriors weren't allowed to be created.
It's no accomplishment to get good at disarm, since there's a big difference between disarm when compared to backstab and archery. Backstab and archery happen to be HARD TO GET GOOD AT.
Any yahoo who joins the Byn can become an expert disarmer without ever seriously risking their life. Warriors are the easiest class to play and survive with in the game, and to reflect this their disarm skill ought to be toned down.
QuoteIt's no accomplishment to get good at disarm, since there's a big difference between disarm when compared to backstab and archery. Backstab and archery happen to be HARD TO GET GOOD AT.
Any yahoo who joins the Byn can become an expert disarmer without ever seriously risking their life. Warriors are the easiest class to play and survive with in the game, and to reflect this their disarm skill ought to be toned down.
Had to highlight the one section, since I think your the 5th or 6th person to say it, but others have ignored thusfar.
And the bolded section, add to that and with no real risk to using or failing later. The skills of other classes have a lot of risk to use, hell, backstab carries risks just to practice.
QuoteThat assassin IS a master of his weapon style, something you cannot become without knowing how to grip and retain your weapon, Hell, IRL the most common way somebody becomes disarmed is in a strike or parry, not by an attempt by his opponent to remove the weapon.
Right, because that assassin focuses all his time into MELEE fighting...bullshit.
The assassin is supposed to be the first strike, subtly killing type...not a warrior...it says later on they gain some warrior-like qualities...but that does not make them a warrior.
That way of thinking that an assassin should be able to hold his own against a warrior is h&s style thinking IMHO.
He shouldn't be fighting melee for any extended period of time period. It's not what he's designed to do.
Noone addressess the issue of how in real life a single successful disarm would most likely be the END of the fight.
As it is I think those disarmed get off too easy...they get plenty of time to turn tail and run. But most choose not to...then get beat...and complain that it was unrealistic that they got disarmed and lost because of it????!!!!!!
I think it was unrealistic that they keep fighting after being successfully disarmed in the first place.
Heh, and the benefits to having a good backstab are MUCH greater than the benefits to having a good disarm skill.
QuoteQuote:
It's no accomplishment to get good at disarm, since there's a big difference between disarm when compared to backstab and archery. Backstab and archery happen to be HARD TO GET GOOD AT.
Any yahoo who joins the Byn can become an expert disarmer without ever seriously risking their life. Warriors are the easiest class to play and survive with in the game, and to reflect this their disarm skill ought to be toned down.
Had to highlight the one section, since I think your the 5th or 6th person to say it, but others have ignored thusfar.
And the bolded section, add to that and with no real risk to using or failing later. The skills of other classes have a lot of risk to use, hell, backstab carries risks just to practice.
Disarm is in NO WAY equivalent to backstab in the long run, and it's difficulty to train shouldn't be either.
Quote from: "Anonymous"Noone addressess the issue of how in real life a single successful disarm would most likely be the END of the fight.
Not if your opponent has two weapons (along with some spares), which many do.
QuoteAs it is I think those disarmed get off too easy...they get plenty of time to turn tail and run. But most choose not to...then get beat...and complain that it was unrealistic that they got disarmed and lost because of it????!!!!!!
I think it was unrealistic that they keep fighting after being successfully disarmed in the first place.
That, I can agree with you. But defeating four opponents by disarming them all? Somehow my suspension of disbelief can't abide by that.
If your opponent can dodge your sword with ease, why shouldn't they be able to react similarly to your foot? If you can't strike their torso, why should you be able to strike their dagger with enough force to knock it from their hands? The deciding factor in a fight should be weapon skill, offense, defense, and the ability to parry (a warrior wins hands down in all those factors). Winning a fight by kicking somebodies chitinous platemail repeatedly, or by knocking their weapon from their hand time and time again isn't realistic.
Right. Assassins are just used to fighting when odds are against them, removing targets with multiple guards, etc. The first strike, i.e. backstab, is their only priority. Without it, they're shit. Assassins -never- fight in melee very long.
What the hell are you smoking?
Yes, the first paragraph is sarcasm.
Hmm. Just noticed.
But this thread started as an attempt to see how players felt about changing disarm, and it's turned into warriors vs. other classes discussion. As in, it's felt that disarm is the only thing that makes warriors superior. This...is wrong.
Exactly. Some things just can't be said enough.
Quote from: "Quirk"Warriors would not somehow mystically turn into weaklings if disarm was changed to be a skill with some nodding acquaintance with realism.
So what, disarm -is- a warrior's melee forte no matter how you slice it. Archery is expensive? Forage for stones. Backstab is hard? What do you expect it's a killing blow, not merely causing someone to drop a weapon. If you don't like disarm, tough. But because -you- don't like it, please don't try to change it for other players. Spam disarm should be dealt with on a case by case basis. I have seen maybe two people with serious spam disarm problems in my years of playing. Both were -dealt- with. You want some serious issues to deal with about the game ERS? How about lack of emotes and virtual recognition of surroundings that I see from oh so many players. Far more detrimental to the game then some dude with crazy disarm kicking your ass. This post was created in order to prevent spam disarm, not in order to weaken it. Stop it please. Now for you people that view disarm as unrealistic, what is parry? It is deflecting their weapon with your own. Now if you can deflect their weapon, why can't you deflect it so effectively it falls out of their hands. The are soooooo many things disarm could be, its up to the person to rp it well. Like I said, case by case basis. I see people do it well, I see twinks, just like with any skill or guild. Now let's stop this, we all think spam disarm is bad, spam anything is bad, nothing we can do about it except copy it, send it to the mud, let the professionals deal with it.
Quote from: "Faglore"So what, disarm -is- a warrior's melee forte no matter how you slice it.
No. Warriors' uber weapon skills are their melee forte. A warrior will usually take down an equally practised member of any other class without breaking a sweat in normal melee combat with no need to resort to disarm. Where it becomes unrealistic is when significantly weaker warriors who cannot hold their own in melee can somehow disarm opponents whose weapons they can't even meet with their own to parry.
Quote from: "Faglore"Now if you can deflect their weapon, why can't you deflect it so effectively it falls out of their hands.
That statement betrays a comprehensive ignorance of how fighting works. Parrying has been a staple of almost every method of fighting with melee weapons since the dawn of time. Disarms were for the majority of weapon styles rare and difficult to achieve against a skilled opponent. While modern sport fencing utilises weapons light enough that striking a weapon out of someone's hand may be possible on a frequent basis, this was not the case in many of the rapier styles it developed from, and most certainly is not the case in older sword and shield styles. How do you envisage these disarms working? What goes on in your head when you see the word "disarm"?
Quirk
QuoteWhat goes on in your head when you see the word "disarm"?
What's the difference? It could be any one of a hundred different possiblities to -how- it happened. I would think, as a player of Arm Quirk your imagination would be broad instead of so narrow.
If you aren't parrying, it can't be from a parry. Which would be the beginnings of most disarm -maneuvers-, as people are describing.
Quirk's imagination is fine. That's why they asked what -you- pictured.
Parrying a blade and striking against it from the opposite direction with another, levering it from their grip.
Striking their wrist or knuckles and breaking their grip on the weapon.
Physically striking at them expecting the parry, and when the do lean into it and use brute strength turn their wrist.
...and on...and on...and on...and on...
I can't even remember all the different emotes I've use for my disarms.
Whether they are exactly technically right or not isn't the question, so I don't want to see a bunch of different shit posted about how they are impossible or whatthefuckever.
It's a fantasy world, not reality. Every fucking single thing in it doesn't need to be precisely technically correct to the -t-.
Shit, I HATE anal retentive twits that think everything should be 100% realistic in a fantasy world...it's people like that who go too far and take a great game like Arm and turn it into a boring piece of shit like some of the others out there that are sooo realistic...they aren't even fun anymore.
Anyway, I'm sick of this whole subject, the fact of the matter is I have more faith in the imms to maintain the balance and keep the fun and fantasy in the game. There is a reason Arm is the best of the RPI and it's partly because some of the others have too much realism in them...it's just no longer fun anymore and turns people away. We do all play to have fun. at least I know that I do.
Post all you want, but I'm done...sick of it...and I'm out.
I see disarm as several dozen possibilities, most of which have nothing to do with parry. If you, Quirk, would read the posts before my last one, especially Evilroeslade's, you would see that I only put that to explain why knocking a weapon out of their hand, even though you can't hit them, is possible. They attack you, you defend yourself so skillfully by blocking their weapon with your own, that you knock it out of their hands. I am also done, as this post has gotten to large for people to gather all the facts, and people are taking my comments out of context. I see that there is no reasoning with some of you, so you keep your opinions and I will keep mine. But I won't meddle with your characters affairs, and I expect the same courtesy from you.
Has anybody been listening? From personal experience, I have as a warrior, been able to defeat OTHER warriors that were clearly better at fighting than I was just because I happened to be better at disarm.
I was better at ONE skill, and they were better at every other.
I'd like to hear how that's balanced once more.
Because you choose to interpret that through coded actions, when their technique could have been sloppier, you could have have been more athletic, your eyes could have been better, they could have been overly confident in their attacks upon you. For example, they know they are better, they swing hard, you duck out of the way they stumble and lose their grip. You were getting your ass kicked, saw an opening to cause them to screw up, they do. Or, they hit you twice, because they are better, and rather then getting into a quick defensive stance they greedily aim for more, and you catch them off guard. Or as you were getting hit you learned their offensive pattern, spotted an opening, and in your desperation you get that weapon out of their hand somehow. I felt as though I owed you one last post, as I admire you ERS, since I assume you were referring to me as one of those people. Now I am officially done, feel free to pm me if you want to argue more as I am always up for it.
Make disarm harder to learn (in other words, a longer delay between times that the skill rises).
Make getting things from the ground during a fight harder (IE: apply the drop code to getting things if the character is in a fight).
There is nothing else to discuss. Nothing. The disarm skill is not overbalanced. You beat that fighter because you were skilled in that skill, which is an aspect of battle. There are more facets to battle than just hacking, or kicking, or disarming, or bashing, or anything else you can do. That is reality. You can not argue with it.
If that warrior had been as well trained in all the facets of combat as he should have been, you would have lost. He wasn't and he lost, because you had trained that skill better than he had. In other words, you had trained a skill that is crucial to the winning of battles.