Re: new fighting style: using 2 swords
Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:28 pm
After reading my post a second time, I saw that my suggestion was a really bad one. Sorry about that.
Roguelike RPG on Android
https://www.andorstrail.com/
No apologies needed...I wouldn't say it was a bad idea though, everyone has thoughts on how they'd like to see dual wielding implemented.Ian wrote:After reading my post a second time, I saw that my suggestion was a really bad one. Sorry about that.
nyktos wrote: causes - actor condition: "Bad Pun" [-1% AC] [-1% BC]
The lowering ac and bc part definetly doesn't make sense. I've put down some posts explaining why, but I guess I'll group them up here:Pyrizzle wrote:nyktos wrote: causes - actor condition: "Bad Pun" [-1% AC] [-1% BC]
Wokka Wokka wokka!
![]()
Combining the AP of both weapons would probably be the best way to implement duel weilding IMO, but i think that the off handed weapon should be nerfed or have some other disadvantage (like raising the AP cost or maybe lowering the players BC, AC, and/or AD)
I'm going to have to break down your very detailed responseWyrmspawn wrote: The lowering ac and bc part definetly doesn't make sense. I've put down some posts explaining why, but I guess I'll group them up here:
So, our main character is a boy...and I often think of him as around my eldest sons age - 10. The off chance that he knows some form of Chinese Kung Fu, and untrained has the ability to simultaneously wield 2 normal sized weapons without any negative effects doesn't make very much sense to me. However, perhaps the Combat Abilities that Nyktos has brought up, or yet another skill, would help offset this if the player chose to use a skill point or pay-to-train an ability. Right out of the gate though there needs to be some nerf some where, or dual wielding is all this game is going to revolve around, making using a shield completely pointless.Wyrmspawn wrote: Why lowering block chance would be illogical: In Chinese Kung Fu, whenever two weapons are held, usually one is used mainly for offense, and the other for defence. While I'm not so sure about other forms of martial arts, from what I've read in history books, there were several famous warriors who wielded parrying daggers rather than shields, as parrying daggers are easier to move about quickly and are at times more effective than shields at blocking enemy attacks.
Right, blocking two hits at the same time for an enemy should be next to impossible...however, sticking 2 foam sword in my 10 year old sons hands and having him attack me, I am able to successfully block both hits with 1 weapon then achieve a successful counter attack, as I am faster, more experienced, and have a 6th degree blackbelt...blocking kids is easyWyrmspawn wrote: Why lowering attack chance would be illogical: As common sense would tell, blocking two weapons at once would be a lot more difficult than blocking one weapon. Even provided that you have a very clumsy left hand, when you force the enemy to block two of your hits at the same time, the enemy will have to block twice in quick succession, or find some way to block two weapons at the same time, which would increase your chance of landing a hit.
Correct, yet not...While dual wielding can provide a bump to Attack Chance & Block Chance, it could not logically be both at the same time IRL. Tying these in with how dual wielding would effectively work with the least amount of effort is impossible, as combat would become too tedious to want to play. While an off hand attack would provide a good block, if I chose to attack with it instead, I would not be able to block with it at the same time...Wyrmspawn wrote: So, I propose that dual-wielding should increase your total attack chance and block chance by at least 20%, and lower your attack damage by 50% (Yes, I know this is also illogical, but at least it makes more sense than lowering attack chance or block chance!) I also propose that both weapons should have +1 ap cost, as co-ordinating your attacks may take a little more time than attacking in random patterns.