Illarion.org

Fireswords are rare, and should be better.

I propose that when fighting with them, the enemy could get "burnt" . Just like poisoned, their health can gradually go down.

I think this would help the firesword become a better, more powerful sword. It does have magic in it.. however as of right now, it is just like any other sword. I dont know anyone who uses a shield and sword anymore...

Also, I think this would do well with fire magic. (small and big).

This is just like getting poisoned by a mummy. You dont always get poisoned, but you do often enough.

~Nilo~

I was thinking the same thing, except magical items such as a firesword should do exceptional damage to fantastical creatures such as trolls. Now sharp things aren't good against skeletons still would be weak. Obviously demons aren't going to be much affected by fire, so make an ice sword. Also it maybe should shield some fire magic because of the energies colliding or something goofy theory like that.

There should never be a "best" or "better" item in my opinion over others. All weapons should be good at dealing damage to certain kinds of armour and such. And damage delt should be based much on skill and how often you've used that one weapon.

Magical items would create even more confusion with balancing issues.

Kasume wrote:There should never be a "best" or "better" item in my opinion over others. All weapons should be good at dealing damage to certain kinds of armour and such. And damage delt should be based much on skill and how often you've used that one weapon.

Magical items would create even more confusion with balancing issues.

Magic does that too, but you don't see them removing it. There will always be a "better" or "best" weapon for logical reasons. You cannont cut a skeleton, however you can smash it. So obviously a hammer would be better than a dagger.

The point that I was getting at flew way over your head.

Kasume wrote:The point that I was getting at flew way over your head.

Well you weren't specific at all. Care to explain what you meant exactly?

No

If there are magical swords, there need to be magical hammers, magical axes, magical bows, magical etc, etc

Dont worry their coming.

Thats all im gonna say here.

don't say what you cannot realy now.

Kasume wrote:There should never be a "best" or "better" item in my opinion over others. All weapons should be good at dealing damage to certain kinds of armour and such. And damage delt should be based much on skill and how often you've used that one weapon.

Magical items would create even more confusion with balancing issues.

I agree totaly, and the point was, if we had 1 weapon that was just better than all the others, no-one would even think of using any of the others, just like it used to be before fireswords became so rare.

To balance it out, when you increase one attribute of a weapon, eg speed, you decrease another, eg strength.

Everything should have at least one weakness. This includes characters as well.

That's why we neither write down the stats of the items, nor tell you something about it.

And, if you haven't the big picture of the system, you even won't understand these values. Cause ... a strong weapon has no use if the one holding it is as weak as a baby.

For whatever it is worth,

When I started in Illarion I noticed almost everyone prefered the double bladed battle axe. As a matter of fact most folks tried to talk my character into one and "tut-tutted" her when she was looking for a sword. It happened so often it actually got annoying. My character prefers one sword in each hand. No shield. And she likes it that way because it is different from the majority, and she does not beleive she has the strength to properly weild a bulky, heavy style weapon. She prefers speed and agility to brute strenght, and a longer reach than daggers can provide.


She also thought a "firesword" would be something different from the norm, and very special. So despite the exhorbitant cost of one she worked hard for her money and finally earned enough money to buy one. It generally is not used as an "everyday" item (( I use other swords. when I even carry any on me)) because of the costs of replacing it. It is only taken out of the chest and used when a known situation or area are extremely dangerous (ie defending the town from trolland ogre attacks, etc.) If you had something that costly and that special wouldn't you be more carefull with it?

It is very difficult to determine what it's "up sides" and "downsides" are. For as much as they cost to buy I would like to know a little more about them.

Sincerely,

Mia Handur

As it is now, double axe is very overpowerd.
Sylian use a double axe most of the time. Why?
Because fire sword and knight shield make him take more damage and he can't damage the enemy so much. I would love to see that weapons get more like. Why should a sword be so much weaker than a double axe?

Mia Handur wrote:prefers speed and agility to brute strenght

Because fire sword and knight shield make him take more damage and he can't damage the enemy so much. I would love to see that weapons get more like. Why should a sword be so much weaker than a double axe?

Two valid points in my opinion, which need some serious thought some time. The funny thing is that this is only about the firesword so far, but I have this problem in general, concerning other weapons - kind of like what Ragor is getting to, up there.

Why should a character who's more nimble and agile (using a longsword or two) be an inferior melee fighter to one who's just a brawn-forced brute swinging a large axe? Any fantasy story, any piece of fiction, even reality itself will prove that this is nonsense. The way it is, my impression is that if you're agile and nimble, you make a good distance fighter (i.e. with bows), nothing more.
Also, if you use light weapons, you are almost condemned to automatically lose to heavy weapons, as Ragor put it up there. What's the point in having them, then? Is the longsword made so bloody weak just because every skeleton drops it as a standard item? Also, where are the shortswords? In Illarion right now, though, if someone's wearing a plate, they won't give a damn if you're using a sword, which makes no sense. Someone with a short sword, if I have understood the technicalities of fighting correctly, would deal a tiny bit of damage against someone in a platemail, within the game physics of Illarion.
Roman tacticians had their soldiers employ short swords against armor, ironically - the short sword was used to pierce weakpoints or open spaces in the armor (under the chin, armpits, etc.) and to quickly kill those armored opponents.
Funny fact: my character Sian has two fireswords in his possession, and as he oftenly fights with two longswords, he hardly ever even touches them because for one he has too much respect for magic, and two they're just too "flashy". It's funny though how people react when I write before a duel: "#me draws a slender blade, almost simmering blue in the sunlight", and they then laugh OOC when I show them it's a standard longsword I'm using - the thing I get to hear the most which annoys me, is that it's a "Skeleton sword", which it is technically - yet it's not - three longswords were given to my char Sian by other characters, therefore there is also a bit of story, and character-attachment to it.
OOC, they don't take the character seriously, which I understand, as fighting with two longswords is weak - OOC. Sadly enough, some carry this to IC behaviour. That's just plain stupid, and I think it's an indicator that the fighting system needs to be revised again.
For example, why not make it so that the different weapons have a much greater influence on your defense? That would make the character with shield and one-handed weapon useful. It would also weaken the broad mass of the people with the axes, as they'd then probably have a lower defense.

Edit:

Neonfire wrote:Cause ... a strong weapon has no use if the one holding it is as weak as a baby.

Yes, so why are there still so many babies running around with double-axes, and getting away with it? The double-axe requires equal to almost no skill to kill things quickly with it - which may sound logical at first, but it isn't on the long run (I don't want to know how many mages are using a double-axe in their spare time).
There needs to be a stronger distinction between slashing and piercing weapons, skill-wise. That alone might actually eliminate this problem.

The reason why people use it is because of its attack frequency. Double sided axes can be employed effectively, however these people wear little to no armor. Nordic berserkers used large axes very well and they wore fur or leather armor. Maybe we need armor restrictions on heavy weapons. It makes perfect sense to me. More offense with less defense without having to lower any stats or such.
Daggers would be especially effective against most armor, however the chance of accually hitting your enemy is sharply reduced.

I would like to have more balanced weapons. More weapons too.
Sylian is using a double axe, eventhough I would prefer a nice two handed-sword, basterdsword, or any sword at all exept short and katana.
Maybe a good shield too. Probably not a fire sword though.
The thing is, if he wears anything exept double axe or maybe war hammer, he gets beaten in almost every duel. If I want him to be a great warrior, he can't be beaten from a tailorer, can he? Then the game force me to use the double axe. I think putting in clases would make the game better. Like when he starts, he could chose some simple settings.
Like if he want to be a berserker, heavy armored warrior or standard warrior (as some small example) If he chose berserker, he get good at heavy weapons and fight good, but he got to use light or no armor at all.
He also could get a "rage" or "berserk" skill to use sometimes, like ones a day. Heavy armored warrior could be many things. He could be a town guard, knight, or a warrior in battle. He should be good at using full and heavy armor. But he is very bad at dodging. He should use weapon like a sword and shield. Not a bow or anything like that. Maybe a spear.

He could get "defencive stance" skill bonus. When he use it, he goes defensive and block hits. The standard warrior could be good at the most weapons and armors. Maybe not the heaviest. He could be a good mercenary, bounty hunter, or something. He could even be a lesser smith with fighting skills. He get no special skill.

A class who you maybe like is the duelist. He make duels. He is fast fighting and fast dodging. He wears light or no armor. He is good paryer and good at using the oppoments mises. He could wear light weapons like rapier, short sword, dagger or katana.

What about bows?

Drathe being a keen archer is also a dab hand at using a sword. Not from want of training with such a weapon but simply because wind arrows, arrows and bolts fail to hurt any monster, character enough before they close the ground and are upon him.

Now I don’t know about other characters that use a bow maybe they could also put their input here so that I could see if Drathe is alone with this problem. But it has always been the case for Drathe even more so now the fighting system has been altered.

The usual run of things:
Drathe armed with bow comes across a monster.
Aims lets loose maybe three (four arrows on a good day).
Then (lag permitting) drops the bow and quiver for melee weapons.

Now despite his high level of skill with a bow, I find it so exasperating that he is always fighting hand to hand. I don’t expect him to kill with a single arrow nor do I expect arrows to fly like lightening, Drathe is far for the circus freak Legolas from Lord of the Rings. But it does not pay to be an archer, for the skill is all but worthless I feel.

Ok, ok, it does have a very slight advantage when in a group of fighters. For they can fight and the archer can let fly a pot shot or two. But to stand alone or as but a few of you…

‘May the goods bless your sword of metal, as the spirit of wood fails you.’

Drathe, you're not alone.

I built a character absolutely independant of strength and constitution, therefore he should be rather well with using bows (I put strong emphasis on dexterity and perception), but the character still needs around 20 arrows to put a mummy to rest. With the mummy slamming him in melee after the first two shots. And the character still being an under-average melee combattant.

Not to mention beasts like Trolls or ogres. He can hardly fight them, no matter what equipment he has. Using a bow against them? Joke, right? I've fired full 50 arrows at a Troll once, I believe it hardly harmed it.


Edit: So that it's not just a complaint, rather a proposal:

I believe it should take 1-10 arrows/bolts/stars/javelins to kill any living creature (exceptions: skeletons, demons), given that the projectiles actually connect with target. It makes no sense that a creature can run around with 27 arrows sticking out of its body as if nothing happened.

Make projectile weapons deadlier. Double, or even triple the basic damage. Make it harder to actually land the hit, though.

When you're using a bow, for example, and firing at someone from a distance, you try to disable or kill them. You aim for things like legs and other limbs to hamper their movement, their neck and head to kill them quickly. This is simply common sense. What else would anybody use projectile weapons for?

You're not shooting at their most heavily-armored spots, for the biggest part - you'd normally aim for weak-spots, and besides that, anybody who can prove to me that a metal armor just makes an arrow bounce off (given it's not rounded off like i.e. Roman armors), congratulations. As far as I know, from history and reality and the likes, an arrow fired at 25 feet of distance in a straight line at the target will pierce virtually any medieval armor and impale the person. Not to mention what a javelin can do.

Alright, now applying this theory to game, in method of gaining the skill, an unskilled archer would hardly ever actually hit, while a skilled archer can actually land hits more often, and can therefore be deadlier with the distance attacks. That serves for two things: "children" don't go using bows like masters, and even the skilled ones take quite some time to actually master the art of distance combat, however the distance combat becomes something dangerous.

In turn, it could be considerably harder to defend/dodge attacks when you're using the distance weapons.

It would also make it alot harder for people to learn distance combat, while at the same time rewarding the characters with a useful ability, should they truly focus on it.

On another note, as we don't play in an Asian-style setting, why do we have throwing stars and not throwing knives?

You're not shooting at their most heavily-armored spots, for the biggest part - you'd normally aim for weak-spots, and besides that, anybody who can prove to me that a metal armor just makes an arrow bounce off (given it's not rounded off like i.e. Roman armors), congratulations. As far as I know, from history and reality and the likes, an arrow fired at 25 feet of distance in a straight line at the target will pierce virtually any medieval armor and impale the person. Not to mention what a javelin can do.

Actually, leather covered or clothing covered chain could help. Leaving a neck to weakness.
Though, this is the problem. This is, virtually. I doubt we can have a little paperdoll pop up before you shoot an arrow and choose where to shoot in the amount of time to be able to kill the person in one hit, before the enemy gets close to disarm you. One swing with a sword, will knock a bow out of your hand if the swordsman has a brain.

Also don't tell me that your peircing full plate mail from a measly twenty five feet while you are wearing plate mail yourself. Let alone lift your bloody hands with a normal (ten) strength level.

Last time I checked also, twenty to thirty some swings to a naked body (trolls) usually has them maybe fumbling or at least weakened.

It just all seems ironically interesting.

My real point. There are A LOT of technicalities that need tampering. Yes. It's all realized. But (IMO) I just don't think it's rather needed. So buff up the damage that arrows do a little bit and be slightly happy with it.