Weapon Ideas

[Kuiper7986]

Since weapons are like one of the mainstreams of the game here some I ideas that should have these stats to them.

Weapon Stats for all weapons:

Power: (The strength of the weapon)

Accuracy: (How accurate the weapons is)

Defense: (How good of a defensive weapon it can be)

Durability: (How fast it gets damage, less durability means it needs more repairs)

Weight: (The overall weight of the weapon, more weight means slower attack tempo, less weight is obviously inverse)


Secondly, I think you should be able to hold two weapons at the sametime. Of course it\'d have to be logical. You could have like 2 daggers, 2 shortswords, or 2 longswords, but you can\'t have like two battle axes or two two-handed swords. Of course there should be some weapons that require two hands like a spear, two-handed swords, broadswords...etc; anything big.

Thirdly, I think jewelry making should be part of sword making (specifically the handle). Like you could put a precious stone on the handle of the sword to give it special abilites.

Fourth idea it that, I don\'t think weapons should be limited to metals. There could be wooden, like a wooden staff with a jewel on top or something. Or a wooden club.

Fifthly all swords should have a special attack hidden inside of them and can only be gained when you gain experience with using that specific sword.

Sixthly I don\'t think weapons should be easy to smith.
In the game-that-shall-not-be-named all you need is a hammer and a bar, then boom you make a weapon just like that with one bar with all the parts already put in it.
In PS i think it should be like, first you have to make the handle of the sword, then you have to make the blade, then after you have to put the two pieces together to make one complete weapon.

[Bonez]

umm i think most of that has been talked about before except for the smithing which i agree with...it should be difficult collecting diff metals and traveling to diff places to make... lots of work for it not easy like the steel bar and a hammer like is runescape

[tygerwilde]

typically, the rules on two weapon fighting in any game deals with one weapon being smaller, Dnd simply reqs that the second weapon be lighter than the first, whereas in DAoC, the second weapon can only be the lightest of a class, so if you use axe, you can use a hand axe in your second hand

[Ajatollah]

Ok I\'m not a good writer so please forgive my mistakes and crappy grammar. It\'s the idea that counts, right?


Why use so many attributes? I think there could be a more rational and easier way to do this instead of putting every attribute known to man (or every other rpg) in one object. I would like to suggest another approach into this matter. It would be based on the skill of the user, rather than to weapons with kazillion attributes.

Basically, what is a weapon? A lump of made into a specific shape and balanced so that it can be used, in combination with a couple limbs, to do damage to a living body. This is an example so undeads do not count. I doubt that a weapon \'defends\', \'attacks\', \'damages\', or brings your slippers by itself. It\'s the user that makes it happen. This approach makes use of this fact (opinion?).

In some MMORPG\'s which I have read about (and played a couple), there are some sort of level restrictions on weapons/equipment. This indicates that the items have been made so, that a newbie using a high level item would imbalance the game. In Real Life(tm) things are far beyond this. A fencing duel is up to the fencer, not the blade. Unless the durability issue comes along (the sword can break). But if the system would make more use of the skill level of a player, all this could be avoided. Ie. Less work, more diversity. Everybody happy?

So, what am I ranting about? In my example, weapon comes with a few less attributes than above: Material, weight, durability, craftmanship (ie. how well the blade was made).  And these values are related to each other if funny ways.

WTH?!?!?
Yes. What I\'m saying is that the weapon should have only the attributes it has, realistically (yes, yes it\'s _fantasy_, but ideas aren\'t banned here, right?). We could say that there is the material ( Steel), and then there\'s the craftmanship (skill level/whatever of the swordsmith). These values would affect durability (ie. how much damage the blade can take before getting dull/broken), weight (in general, the lighter the better, I\'m told) and  craftmanship.

The math here goes something like this:
What we\'d need is; the default skill level required to make this certain type of weapon, the default weapon weight, and the basic durability. During creation, these attributes are modified by the material used and the skill the weapon was crafted in. The skill level the creator had would also affect the later use of the weapon. Meaning that it would be the \'default skill level\' when making checks in repair skill.

There. All we need is someone to write about the skill use during combat and my plan would be perfectly set for you to follow. But now that guy has to rest his mind and think about it some more. I\'m not a good writer because I can\'t think and write at the same time. One must follow the other.

[Ajatollah]

And to the second part of my rant.

Clearing up the previous:
Weapon attributes:
 * durability, depends on (when forged)
    - weaponsmithing skill
    - material

 * material
    - can be used to determine effect on special types of creatures (ghosts, magical creatures)

 * craftmanship
    - sets the default skill level of repairing/upgrading

 * weight
    - determines - in conjunction with the skill/skills needed - the speed (strikes over time) and of course the burden when carried)

Ok I hope I\'m making sense in this point.
Now what about magical effects and enchantments in the weapon? My mind is set in this way: The basic enchantment that a magical weapon has affects the way the weapon is handled. That could mean an increase to skills required or decrease in the attributes the skill is tested against during an attack. Naturally there can, and should be all sorts of enchantments available to weapons and other eqipment, but this concentrates on weapon usage and special effects.

We could take an example from my own library: The Elric saga (By Michael Moorcock). Elric has this neat weapon which not only sucks the souls of those slain with it, but grants certain bonuses to the wielder. These bonuses are propably increased the same pace the sword consumes souls.

In my terms, I would imagine the sword to be something like this:
 - weight: huge.  It would require tremendeous strength to wield it and to strike swiftly.
 (The sword was made by some demon lords and it is, after all, a greatsword, being 1,5-2 meters long [I guess])

 - material: Something black stuff. Prolly metal.
 (It can even kill gods)

 - craftmanship: Superb. This blade cannot be harmed by almost anything.
 (we could say that some magic with horrible porportions can harm it, even destroy it)

 - durability: massive. Read above.

***
Enchantments.
 - adds strength
 - adds endurance/hitpoints (it sucks souls so why not?)
 - diminished requirements for usage (Elric was an ill albino, he couldn\'t even wear his armour without strengtening herbal drink)
 - adds magical abilities (just something out of my head)
 - own will (can initiate attacks when readied if check against user\'s willpower fails)

Ok in this point I could use some feedback and comments, if you will. This is more like talking to yourself.

[tygerwilde]

see ajatolla, there\'s one flaw in your logic, a good fencer will ALWAYS choose a good weapon because they know that if there\'s a minor flaw in the weapon his opponent can use that flaw to their advantage, losing him the match.

not everything is dependant upon the skill of the person, theres a man who can throw a quarter through a watermelon, that doesn\'t mean he could throw a folded peice of aluminum foil the same size thru the same watermelon, firstly, it doesn\'t have enough weight to give it the momentum it would need to travel through the melon, second, it wouldn\'t have the strength that pressed nickle and copper would, the aluminum would bend on contact with the exterior skin of the melon.

yes, some weapons are balanced so that they are better used defensively, more able to quickly block a strike, but in most cases, such weapons are balanced toward the hilt, which allows you to make a flicking motion with your wrist, bringing the tip around quickly, and carry less momentum in their attacks, mostly doing less damage, but not in all cases, which is why an attack/defence modifier, like you find in asherons call, adds to the realism of the game, as well as allowing a person to choose their play style, by letting them choose to use a more defensive, or offensive, weapon

durability can be a good or bad thing, depending on how you look at it, and this is using the durability system from DAoC, cause it\'s the only one I have experience with
durability prevents one person from handing a lowbie an uber weapon, and then that newbie gaining fifty levels in one day using it
on the other hand, you\'ve worked hard to earn a quest weapon, knowing that if you use it, eventually, it will be damaged beyond repair.


in order to have any reality whatsoever, you have to give weapons at least some modicum of attributes, to base a game solely on skill is folly, sorry, but that\'s just the way it is

[Ajatollah]

Hmm...  *hard thinking*

Yes yes. You are correct in comparing the aluminium foil and the quarter. But what we are talking here is martial combat equipment, where differences aren\'t as great and possibilities of use are tightly restricted.
But I don\'t quite understand what you mean with the first argument. I mean, naturally ppl like to use good weapon and so on. But only those who can afford them have access to them, in terms of craftmanship and prices. Maybe it\'s just me, and I didn\'t get my idea expressed as well as I wanted to.

But I disagree what you mention about the durability. In my scheme, it would be impossible for a lowbie to rise 50 levels a day even if he gets a high level weapon. Only in that case, that the user has a very high skill in fencing, that could be possible. But that can be restricted via the experience/skill gain system. And think of this: if any player decides to use experience to increase only his fencing skill, wouldn\'t he/she be a great fencer, regardless of the weapon he/she uses?
But I think you mean something like a lowbie char with bad fencing skill would cause the weapon to wear out faster? Yes I think so too. But in this scheme, there wouldn\'t be _level_ restrictions. The similar effect can be made with comparing the weapon skill level with the \'craftmanship\'  attribute and with some formula, remove the appropriate amount from the current durability. See? Easy and without level restriction.

There would not be any \'?ber\' weapons. This is something I\'m running for. A system where the item itself cannot imbalance the game. Only the player with sufficient skills can. If that can be called imbalancing.

Now I have some more thoughts but I need to consider them more. Dunno, maybe I should write an essay about the matter.

[Kuiper7986]

What does \"In my scheme, it would be impossible for a lowbie to rise 50 levels a day even if he gets a high level weapon,\" mean? Durability means how easy or not easy it is for that weapon to be damage and there aren\'t any levels in the game.

[tygerwilde]

it\'s just a conceptual thing really, even if there are no levels, there will still be some way by which people rank their characters, whether they compare their skills, or their total experience, or what. in time, players will have their own lvl structure, in AC, you can\'t advance past 126, but you can continue to gain xp, and players have a structure for lvl equivelancy, some chars claim to be close to lvl 200 now.

[Ajatollah]

Hehe, beat the poet, since he writes worse than a monkey.

Kuiper7986:
What I mean is that a weapon is a a tool, it should not imbalance the game or give the character an advantage over fellow players who use, say weapons with lower quality. It should be the skill that is important. This is due to the idea I have about roleplaying. A character should be a _person_, not a dummy doll to put equipment in. If we could get rid of the eq-monkeys, the gameplay would be more interesting since a good swordsman would be a good swordsman, regardless of the sword he/she uses. The weapon isn\'t indifferent but the game could be balanced so, that the (often) magical properties would not imbalance the game.
Perhaps I should have written that line earlier, since that is fit to be the ground rule to my rant here. At least for now, I just woke up.

tygerwilde:
Sorry, I wasn\'t talking about the rank system for a character. This rant is (should be at least) about weapons and appropriate skills and the game balance regarding them.

[Kuiper7986]

So your saying a guy with a sword made of wood with great skill should be able to beat someone with a Steel Sword with also great skill.....it just wouldn\'t be logical.

P.S Was that  \"since he writes worse than a monkey,\" statement referred to me?

[Zig]

Even if you have a wooden sword, if you are really skilled with it then you should do better when fighting against a novice with  steel sword. Sure anyone can swing a sword but if youre not used to its weight and how to handle it then when you strike it will be very awequard and you will mostlikely throw youself of balance and be open to an attack. You can have the best fricking sword in the world and it not do you any good if you dont know how to use it. Equiptment will only take you so far but experiance is the ultimate defining line.
Skoogie likes axes, mmmmmm axessss....hharllgulaah

~ZiG~

[tygerwilde]

see, the point is, the way that ajatolla was defining it, a weapon doesn\'t matter at all, if two players with nearly matched stats were facing each other, one with a far inferior weapon, they would still be evenly matched, everything is based on skill

obviously, that just would not work, the steel sword would make toothpicks outta the wooden one

[zinder]

obviously, that just would not work, the steel sword would make toothpicks outta the wooden one

Only if they fight blade against blade. And skilled fighter normally dont fight that way.

[tygerwilde]

a steel blade would shatter the wooden one when you struck it, even with the flat of the blade, a wooden sword is far heavier and has a much greater momentum, even if it was miraculously capable of taking a strike, all the person using steel would have to do to disarm his opponent, would be to turn the blade just a bit and slice it in two, the quality of the weapon is one of the most important factors in a fight, another thing that hasn\'t been discussed, and will most likely never be implemented into a game is type of weapon, different weapons are more effective against each other, such as a staff being effective against a sword due to reach, speed and such. a halberd is more effective against a staff because it can strike with inside a staffs defences, and so on, every weapon has it\'s upsides and downsides, and the best at one weapon can be defeated if the right weapon is used against their strength